NEXr5GO First Impressions

Topics related to WiFiX branded routers
Forum rules
Use the SEARCH function for related topics PRIOR to posting a new topic on the same subject.
Post Reply
toddw
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2020 5:43 pm
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 68 times

NEXr5GO First Impressions

Post by toddw »

Got a pair of these (NEXR5GO) for testing, I wanted to see if the WiFi performance was better than the 3526 and 1608. Out of the box, this is a nice size router, solid metal construction, with plenty of room to work. It’s slotted for 2xMimo unless you forgo the wifi ports which defeats the purpose of this router. It’s also 100M ethernet ports so there is a back plane limitation. However, where I live, if I could get 100mbps I would be extremely happy as the towers simply can’t provide that much bandwidth due to everyone pounding on them.

The SMA ports required adapters, but The Wireless Haven said that was in the works to be remediated, along with the missing modem screws. I’m confident that this is true as all the other router shells I bought from The Wireless Haven have included these standards.
Inside there is plenty of room to work.

And I like that is not as wide as the 1608/3526, and the fact that the ports are part of the chassis and not the top, making cabling and servicing easier as you don’t have to worry about snapping the cables (hot glue pending on this unit).
Nexr5go-inside.jpg
And I like the form factor, below you can see the size difference between the 826 and 1608:
Nexr5go-w-1608-826.jpg
Top view:
Nexr5go-top-view.jpg
Now for the reason I am posting this, I have base lined the wifi performance from my office (these units are upstairs, on the opposite end of the house in the loft). From my office, I get 2-3 bars from the 826, 1608 and 3526. I run Ubiquiti mesh, but for the past few weeks I used the wifi direct from the units.

All tests were done on 2.4GHz, with 20MHz width for max coverage.

1608 and 3526 baselines where : -78
78.jpg

Now the NEXR5GO’s turn….

-59
59.jpg

Very noticeable difference. Now to add another variable, order some 2.5A power adapter upgrades from The Wireless Haven. All these units come with 2.0A and I read that the 2.5 stabalizes weak LTE signals and boosts wifi. So here are the real results from a Wi-Fi perspective after swapping the power supplies:

1608\3526\826: Baseline -78, Upgraded PS -69

69.jpg

NEXR5GO: Baseline -59, Upgraded PS -56

56.jpg

If your not busting past 100mbps, then these units rock for us out in the country. The upgraded wifi can definitely save a buck or two from hooking up a mesh system to these routers.

Very happy with the units I have.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
Didneywhorl
Posts: 3609
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 5:37 pm
Location: USA
Has thanked: 1359 times
Been thanked: 754 times
Contact:

Re: NEXr5GO First Impressions

Post by Didneywhorl »

Have you run speed tests on each, over wifi, to compare wifi speed throughput from the net to device?
toddw
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2020 5:43 pm
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 68 times

Re: NEXr5GO First Impressions

Post by toddw »

Not yet, I have to flip the 3526 to the same carrier so all things are equal. I thought about setting up a speed test server on a LAN port so I can really try to max it out as my internet connectivity ranges from 6mbps to 60mbps depending on tower load.
aaronel91
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2021 2:53 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: NEXr5GO First Impressions

Post by aaronel91 »

So based on your testing, when using a Quectel EM160R-GL or better, would you prefer the NEXR5GO or something like the WG3526 or WG1608D? Seems like your WiFi tests show the NEXR5GO to be superior WiFi. However, a CAT16 or better modem with 4XMIMO would require drilling out the case of the NEXR5GO for more antennas. Also, as you mentioned, the back plane limitation of 100MB/s, but I doubt I would be reaching those speeds regardless.
Post Reply

Return to “WiFiX Routers”