<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Dave Feuer wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:200912180815.AA54264012@connetrix.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Michel Py" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org"><email@example.com></a>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:45:34 -0800
<pre wrap="">Joel, the WRT610n does NAT at 300Mb/s? I mean measured in the
world, not only manufacturer's marketing?
In "real word" tests it does about 50% to 60% of that. The older
600 was a bit faster. But still not bad for something you can
pick up for $179 or less at WalMart.
Sent via the WebMail system at connetrix.com
Here is something that I wrote after we took the opportunity to play
with one, for an hour about a year ago:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">One of our campus departments recently
purchased a Linksys WRT610N, which is a consumer-grade SOHO (Small
Office/Home Office) NAT/Firewall/Wireless AP, which cost somewhere in
the neighborhood of $170.00.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://tinyurl.com/6ecntu">http://tinyurl.com/6ecntu</a>
Since the device has a 1/100/1000 UTP uplink, I was asked how to
determine what the throughput limit of the device was. They didn't care
much about the wireless part, they bought it mostly for the GigE
uplink. (And we didn't test the wireless part).
The WRT610N arrived on Friday, and after several minutes of
preparation, we used the Windows desktop that happens to be near the
uhmanoa measurement machine to do a simple iperf test.
They departmental guys had already installed DD-WRT ( Linux-derived
open source OS for little routers -- <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
) on it before I got to it, but not tested, and although the DD-WRT
page says it works with WRT610N, we did not get the outside interface
to pass traffic.
So we re-flashed back to the Linksys firmware, and then we were able to
As a control, iperf was run between the two test hosts over a 3 meter
Systimax-D cable, which is supposed to meet or exceed category 6.
Doing "-r" TCP tests, it was shown that the test hosts reliably
obtained in excess of 900 Mbps in either direction over a half a dozen
tests, using just the control wire.
The WRT610N is a 4-port 10/100/1000 UTP switch, and a NAT/Firewall with
a fifth port as an uplink. When we tested with one host on a
switchport, and the other on the uplink port, the max throuhgput was
130 Mbps in either direction. When a third machine was added to another
switch port, the combined throughput was 130 Mbps. The bottleneck
appears to be at the NAT/Firewall function.
When 4 hosts were connected to the switchports, leaving the uplink
un-populated, the built-in switch performed admirably, simultaneous
iperfs yielded > 900 Mbps throughput.