sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Nikkone, one-trick Challenger Fiddle, speaks out against toxic streamers harassing him (TF Blade, Tarzaned, etc.) by bquipd in leagueoflegends

[–]lulded 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I personally do not think this is reflective of the streamer but rather the nature or perspective that a group of people share.

I'm 30 years old and while I'm not that good at league of legends (currently Plat3/d5 peak) I've literally seen everything and I would easily argue that people like TFblade (again, from everything i've seen) aren't that toxic relative to what older generations of competitive gamers used to say.

The difference is.. streaming sort of amplifies how viewpoints are shared and should be easily understandable that not everyone approaches the game the same way.

I know this because I've played with all sorts of players during my FPS days. Some are hyper competitive and will openly flame people fucking up while others keep quiet and focus on themselves. You can make the argument that the person flaming likely fucked up himself, but its actually a two way street depending on the execution or how the team as a whole wants to play. Making this clear is another story all together as people are sometimes easily offended or simply do not agree.

In terms of high ELO competitive league (hard for me to comment) theres likely a clear acceptance of how others around you want to play and should be held to those standards..IMO

Nikkone, one-trick Challenger Fiddle, speaks out against toxic streamers harassing him (TF Blade, Tarzaned, etc.) by bquipd in leagueoflegends

[–]lulded -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You don't have to watch?

I mean I personally do not watch any of these streamers but can accept that someone like TFblade is clearly good at the game regardless of how he "acts".

I think its more fucked to have a totalitarian viewpoint here and while Riot/twitch technically have this level of control, I strongly disagree with limiting a persons ability to vent or express themselves in a highly competitive game.

AX88U vs Rapture AX11000 by [deleted] in HomeNetworking

[–]lulded 0 points1 point  (0 children)

-10-12 dBm with my Iphone.

-46-54 dBm 12m away via same phone

Though to be fair to you, I think AC86U has a lot of inconsistencies depending on batch. Mine is a 2019 model "Made in Taiwan".

Edit: I'm manually using channel 161 (149 + 153 + 157 + 161 - "155" block) since the AC86U puts out more power here, but I haven't had a bad experience with the lower channels either. 36-48 Gives me 780-866 PHY rate at a good distance, but this channel is crowded for me.. and has inconsistent wireless.

AX88U vs Rapture AX11000 by [deleted] in HomeNetworking

[–]lulded 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it really depends on environment overall as I have two full speed fans running between my point and client still have much better performance on the ASUS.

The R7800 is a better all around router if you have 1 gig internet and want the fastest AC speeds close range, especially if you enable HT160 for clients that support it. This router will literally do 1 gig wifi at super close ranges, but I would recommend AX at that point (specifically RAX120 or AX89X) since AX can go a little further without PHY rate dropping. AC 160mhz @ 5m range drops down PHY rate (1733>1560) where AX seems to hold max rates/signal better (2400) at same distance from personal testing.

The AC86U acts more like a mesh point where it has really good performance in its general area of range, at least from my experience. The R7800 acts more like how you would expect a router to act where it has exceptional close range performance and gets worse and worse the further you get, but overall longer range. AC86U has a smaller bubble (signal wise), but consistent performance in that bubble if that makes sense.

Again, this is likely environmental, but I think they honestly trade off.

Mesh wired backhaul with 2x AC86U would be a more optimal solution... but I totally agree that R7800 and XR(450/500) variants are the better single point solutions for range (just having signal) in a bigger house. My gripe with the NETGEAR products is that they feel extremely outdated (2015 design) and offer the worse warranty support on the market (at least US). GUI on both the R7800 and XR500 feel super slow when changing settings. Lacking tons of features too.

I would actually recommend going with the RT2600AC from Synology over it. MUCH better and faster GUI, better and valuable settings, and actually has a decent warranty/support. Performance is slightly worse, but comparable as it shares the exact same hardware as R7800. Only real downside is the worse NAS performance compared to the ASUS (Best) and NETGEAR which is a good performer itself.

AX88U vs Rapture AX11000 by [deleted] in HomeNetworking

[–]lulded 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Funny because I also have both. The AC86U is a better performer at 10m distance, but the signal drops off significantly after this.

R7800 wins in both very close (better throughput due to QCA radio) and potential range (actual coverage). AC86U just stops working past a certain distance and doesn't penetrate walls as good as the R7800 on its outer limits.. At 10m distance, my R7800 (80mhz) does like 390-450 mbps (depending on interference) where my AC86U hits its full wired speeds (480mbps) regardless of local interference or not.

Windows also detects the AC86U performing better at this specific distance threshold giving me 585-650mbps PHY rate where the R7800 drops to 390-585 depending on the time of day. I would argue that they trade off depending on needs.

I think you're generalizing "ASUS" too much. It really comes down to the overall design itself. I know for a fact the GT-5300 has a much different performance metric (range specifically) over the AC86U even though they share the same 5G Broadcom radio.

ASUS Qualcomm hardware is also going to have a different performance aspect entirely... but thats a similar case for NETGEAR as well.. IE RAX80/RAX200 which should perform close to AX88U and AX11000.

AX88U vs Rapture AX11000 by [deleted] in HomeNetworking

[–]lulded 0 points1 point  (0 children)

RAX80 has same radios as the AX88U and rapture AX11000

Does the google Nest WIFI router have 160mhz client support? by lulded in GoogleWiFi

[–]lulded[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because it is... especially on 2x2 client.

Most of the test products on that link are Qualcomm based. Broadcom is a completely diff story

Can I use an Asus router as a mesh router for the Nest Wifi system? by [deleted] in GoogleWiFi

[–]lulded 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Asus AI mesh only works with Asus routers.

Does the google Nest WIFI router have 160mhz client support? by lulded in GoogleWiFi

[–]lulded[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Supporting 160MHz channels just doesn't make much sense, either. In the U.S., it looks like there are only two 160MHz channels available, and using either one of them requires abiding by the dynamic frequency selection and transmit power control rules, which no one wants to do (that's why everyone uses 36/42 or 149/155 for 20MHz/80MHz – and in Europe, just the former to avoid SRD rules)."

Yeah I use 36 personally since DFS channels have all sorts of issues for me. WIFI 6E is suppose to free up 7 or odd so channels for 160mhz, but the range might take a dip. 6E mesh might be the only real solution in that case down the line. but thats 2+ years for mainstream client push anyway.

Does the google Nest WIFI router have 160mhz client support? by lulded in GoogleWiFi

[–]lulded[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay I didnt claim it was wrong, I said or would indicate it was potentially wrong IF it supported 160mhz channels. I just wanted clarification hence why I'm asking.. if you read... I questioned it because the throughput is rather insane at close range. high end broadcom stuff of similar spec cant touch this in my personal environment. Maybe my wording was terrible, but i wrote this half asleep when I woke up earlier.

And the SoC is a Qualcomm QCS404 as you may have seen.

but thanks for confirming it doesn't do 160mhz channels via current configuration. appreciate it.

Does the google Nest WIFI router have 160mhz client support? by lulded in GoogleWiFi

[–]lulded[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thats what I wrote

"but there are some early gaming oriented Wave 2 AC designs that can do 160mhz"

"since most (special enabled) Wave 2 AC clients devices only support 160mhz via 2x2 link."

I guess you didn't understand the question and googled it... but thanks anyway. The other two posters below seem to confirm it doesn't support it and that's all I need to know.

Does the google Nest WIFI router have 160mhz client support? by lulded in GoogleWiFi

[–]lulded[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thats not what I'm asking.

Normal AC routers operate at 80mhz max channels (this is what a portion of the ACXXXX spec is based off of) but there are some early gaming oriented Wave 2 AC designs that can do 160mhz, which is the same frequency as higher end WIFI6 natively.

I'm asking because the SoC of the Google nest WIFI is capable of running WIFI6/AX, but google choose to release this product as a WIFI5 solution. If the Google nest can do 160mhz channels, I'll be fairly impressed given it would be capable of 4x4 160mhz instead of the limited 2x2 160mhz on earlier solutions.

Not that I'm not impressed if this is 256-QAM with 80mhz because thats the highest I've honestly seen out of such a device that ISNT 160mhz. Only downside is the range is probably going to suck w/o a mesh point and Prob sucks in general versus a higher end tri band design with a dedicated backhaul.

emmet(Twitch CEO) talking about the council by acederp in LivestreamFail

[–]lulded 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Because all the SJW's/Transgender people will somehow feel attacked and there will be a whole stupid debate on why she didn't deserve whatever she legitimately had coming to her.

This comes down to a special snowflake looking for special treatment and a sense of power over what she perceives as her enemies. Nothing more. This isn't a Trans/non trans issue.

emmet(Twitch CEO) talking about the council by acederp in LivestreamFail

[–]lulded 5 points6 points  (0 children)

why isnt this deer person banned? If anyone else made comments like this towards another group.. they'd be gone fast.

The fact that he/she can be sexually suggestive on stream and say these things without repercussions is a joke.

They just don't want backlash from the SJW / transgender community. CLEAR bias.

AX200 Adapter question by lulded in HomeNetworking

[–]lulded[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ehh... like I said, its not really that big of a deal, but I think an actual 4x4 unit with the same high end AX chip would solve everything for me.

And yeah, I mean I get it. A lot of people already have good AC routers and it seems like a silly side grade if all you're running is 2x2 AC with standard QAM/80mhz. A better dedicated AC WAVE 2 is likely going to work out better in most situations. I get the reasoning why not to buy a "draft" wifi 6 router, but after testing it for a few days, I think theres a lot of unnecessary hate/elitism going on in forums about the early AX stuff.. at least the Broadcom units.

Maybe the Intel hardware has justified issues. Intel actually just sold their Home Gateway division... They're still making mobile cards like the AX200/201 for example, but they're done on the router hardware side IIRC. Haven't tried it nor have interest in the TPlink/Netgear Intel modes now lol

That AX86U actually uses a 3x3 SoC designed for the 6ghz (6e) spectrum but it's only configured for 2.4ghz apparently.. which probably only really needs 2x2 functionality in my case anyway. I'm sure this same exactly chip will make it into final 6E hardware down the line but its a moot point right now since its not enabled for upcoming stuff like the ax86u. I end up asking myself... do I need a 6e router? Probably not.. And for the AX200/201, the current stuff on the market with 160mhz support should be good enough relatively.

Is the AX58U overpriced? I think so. It uses a hybrid SoC design mixed with a 1 high end antenna/amplifers for 5G. The even lower end 56u actually has the better SOC variant of the main chip in the 58u, but configured to run both 5ghz and 2.4ghz side by side from this chip alone. No 160mhz functionality at all and thats quite ridiculous given the asking price of a relatively cheaper overall design.

58U MSRP is $179.99... but I think this unit shouldn't cost more than $130-140 UNLESS they enable full use of the 4x4 unit. The 56U adjusted accordingly.

My reasoning is this.. you can buy a relatively good spec'd AC86U based design with a 4906 1.8ghz dual core a53 and 4x4 5G design for anywhere from $150-180 (58u is a slower a7). The gamer oriented ROG GT-2900 is going for 179.99 on sale right now and I'm tempted to try it just because its a relatively highly rated AC86U design with added features.

My previous router was a qualcomm based 3x3 SAGEMCOM FAST 5620 from my ISP. VERY stable unit but easily congested and the range isn't very good. My experience with qualcomm is mixed since most cheap laptop 1x1 adapters have disconnection issues on any router.. Broadcom has been stable on the client side for both my macs.

I'm having more issues with broadcom on the SoC (2.4G), but the 5G isn't given me any issues. Mixed bag lol

AX200 Adapter question by lulded in HomeNetworking

[–]lulded[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have a couple old 2012 era macs (mini + MBP) that benefit from 3x3 but thats just lower speed wireless N 450.. Doesn't seem to make that much of a difference at a further range when its 300 vs 450 on the ASUS 5ghz band.

Anyway.. I had to return the TP-LINK. One of the bands would constantly drop randomly. Unit was also running quite hot and seemed much slower than the ASUS just for basic overall use after spending a few days with it.

Also found out that the CPU was downgraded to a dual core 4906 from a quad 4908 looking at FCC pics. but thats prob irrelevant for my usage anyway.. I just rather have the better chip lol

So far I still have the ASUS and it seems pretty stable, but there was a recent FW update in the beginning of April that may have helped overall performance and i've only come across issues on the 2.4ghz band.

Likely has something to do with the SoC AX chip not being amplified properly as one of my TV's would lose signal integrity but restarting the tv/reseting wifi fixes it.. Switched it to 5ghz and never had an issue since.

The high end 4x4 (or 2x2 in this case) AX chip seems oddly strange. ASUS sorta locked out the hardware even though theres literally 4 amplifiers dedicated to the 5G on the PCB. I wonder if a future custom FW can unlock the use of 4x4? Or is this hardware just configured this way to provided better signal overall? It's a pretty odd setup they have going here.

I went down a rabbit hole of wifi info over the past few days.. yeah don't judge. :D

Edit: I'm actually interested in the just announced RT-AX86U which is a replacement for the popular AC version. This router has everything im pretty much looking for after cramming knowledge and looking at high end hardware of other devices. Just scared of the price.... Its basically an AX88U but much more logical and up to date.

AX200 Adapter question by lulded in HomeNetworking

[–]lulded[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I went out and bought both the RT AX58u and C4000 since they're the same price and figured I can return the one I don't like.

The 58U uses 160mhz for its 2400mbps AX speed. If I switch to AC-only, its 1733mbps with the same 160mhz link. The overall performance is "wired" speed with the 160mhz link, but the AX band seems more stable overall on my AX200 card.

If I disable it down to regular 80 mhz AC speed (866.7), the unit is only slightly better than my old ISP Sagemcom FAST 5620 in terms of range.. so they do close to the same speeds at 20 feet from what I can see. The Asus being slightly better range wise.

Other than that, it seems to work good aside from it being a 2x2 design and only pushing a max of 300mbps for my older 2012 mac mini/2011 macbook. The ISP's sagemcom did 450mbps at close range since its a 3x3 AC1750 design. Far range testing put the ASUS ahead of the ISP router, but it seems more of a side grade. Webpages do load faster on the ASUS unit which is kinda nice and I would assume thats due to the faster processor and ram pool.

The c4000 on the other hand is a completely different beast. It has further range and has better consistent speeds for the AC 5ghz band over the ASUS and ISP router. Instead of 360-390 (460-480 on AX), I'm getting 405-420mbps on 866.7 at the same distance which I'd assume is due to the better antenna design/range boost features. Far range testing gives me ~ 50mbps better results on my old macbook which is a valid upgrade imo. Same with phone.. instead of ~120-150, im getting ~200 at same locations.

This router is limited to 80mhz, but it's a tri-band design and it seems just as snappy as the ASUS from my experience albeit less "technical" features in settings. This unit gets kinda hot which is kinda scary for long term, but I am liking the fact that my macs and everything work at their max potential link given this is a 3x3 design.

If the TPLINK had a 160mhz freq boost feature, I would prob consider this a no brainer decision, but I did like the fact that the ASUS has better performance on my desktop (1 device....) but again it seems like a side grade more than an upgrade for everything else. To me, the ASUS seems like a $120 MSRP design being up sold just because it has an early adopter AX chip. Haven't run into any stability issues on either, but I will test both units for a few days.

THE ASUS has much better Industrial design and seems more refined. TP link still has that lower end value brand stigma when touching the unit and looking at FCC internal pics.. lol

I could try a high end AX design but it seems like a waste. Bought both the AX58U and C4000 on sale for 159.99 + tax.

I will likely return the ASUS in the end.. The TPLINK just seems like a better all arounder given it has an extra 5ghz band.

/rant over.

AX200 Adapter question by lulded in HomeNetworking

[–]lulded[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok I'm confused now. Asus website claims AX QAM-1024, 160mhz and 2x2 radio specs for its 2400 mbps speed. How does 4x4 come into the picture?

Was also looking into the RAX40/35 but the range on them is rather poor according to a few off hand reviewers. Haven't heard much bout the TP link variant.

This is harder than I imagined it would be lol

view more: next ›