Broadband Tech > Wireless Networking > RT-N66U or RT-N16

RT-N66U or RT-N16

There are a number of notable differences, but the most significant is that the RT-N66U is a simultaneous dual band device capable of running both 2.4GHz and 5GHz networks at the same time. The RT-N16 is a single band (2.4GHz) wireless router. Whether this will be useful for you will depend on whether your wireless devices have wireless adapters which support the 5GHz band (iPod Touch doesn't).

The RT-N66U also supports 3 stream wifi on both 2.4 and 5GHz bands. But again, you'll only see benefits (faster transfer rates) if your wireless adapters supports it (usually found on higher end wireless adapters).

I have the latest model Galaxy Tab, Transformer Prime and late model HP and Dell laptops, all N devices so I assume they will work on the 5 GHz band. I also have 3 smart-phones that are N devices, which since they don't need to stream I can put on a 2.4 band. Finally, I was thinking about setting up a G only network for guest and miscellaneous devices like the Nooks and older laptops, etc.

I don't know if the above configuration is possible, but I don't want to mix the G and N devices.

802.11n devices does not necessarily have to work in both bands. While some consumer devices have started to support the 5GHz band many recent consumer oriented models do not. The easiest way to know is to look at the specs of the devices and see whether it supports 802.11a in addition to 802.11n. This is because 802.11a uses the 5GHz band only and 802.11n devices that support 5GHz band also supports 802.11a.

The RT-N66U can run both 2.4 and 5GHz networks at the same time. It also has a guest network function to allow segregation of your LAN and guests. However these two are fairly common functions found on almost all simultaneous dual band routers.

Thanks. I'll have to check out the devices. It makes absolutely no sense for me to get the 66U if I can't use the 5GHz band.

Edit: The only device that I have that supports 5 GHz is the Galaxy Tab. I'm not going to spend $100 more on a router spec for a device that only my 9 year old uses.

Thanks for the info. It was VERY useful.

reply to decx

Unfortunately, I have way too many devices to be able to make a decision based on chipset, although I do look at that out of curiosity.

I wonder if it wouldn't make more sense in my personal situation to buy maybe three good, but less expensive, routers (acting as APs), for each floor of the house. I presently have three old Belkin 54g routers that have worked wonderfully for the last 6-7 years. Initially I had them as WDS bridged, but then created a MoCA network and turned them into APs.

I guess the bottom line question is if I don't get an expensive dual band concurrent router, am I better off getting several N class routers and placing them as APs strategically around the house for better coverage (and hopefully faster throughput)?

Yup, it sounds as though you need wifi throughput vice a router with a million features. The closer you can put a device to a source the better.

I think that's the route I'll go then. For less than the $180 dollars I was going to spend, I can pick up probably three decent router/AP devices.

Any recommendations?

Seems kind of expensive to do all that, when my needs are pretty simple. The router/APs are needed for streaming music and occasional video to 3 iPod Touches (G), video, music and internet to 2 tablets (N), internet to 2 laptops (G), video, music and internet to 2 laptops (N) and miscellaneous other small devices like three phones, 4 nooks, etc. that aren't bandwidth heavy or are only sporadically used on the network.

We stream hi-def video sometimes simultaneously to three or four of the different devices mentioned above.

I use an MI424WR configured in a MoCA network as my main router and as additional MI424WR devices in each of the bedrooms upstairs and one each on the main level and basement.

For me, in terms of price/performance, it would seem to make sense just hanging a fairly inexpensive N router/AP off of each MI424WR to make sure I get good and broad coverage.

Is there a disadvantage in doing the above?

reply to mozerd

That was a great hint. It made my search much easier and faster.

reply to Goober

Yeah, I understand. I guess I'm spoiled since the cheapie 54g Belkins that I have worked/work so well for so many years. I just want a simple rip and replace kind of process.

My budget is about $200 total for the project, which is basically what I was going to spend on the 66U.

Another forum I follow, the chap (reliable and skilled) has just got one and is starting to test it.... More to follow.

reply to Goober

reply to Goober
Here's the beauty of doing it mozerd's way:

Your good fortune with the Belkin notwithstanding, many (most?) consumer routers are plagued by erratic behavior when pumping a lot of data and/or doing a lot of downloading. Bad firmware, lack of resources, quality control issues, etc.

They also often lack some of the nicer features you'll find in a more upscale solution. Real firewall rules, bandwidth management and other nice-to-haves aren't common in lower end stuff.

Lastly, by separating the wireless from the router, you are freer to swap out the former as technology changes while retaining the investment in the anchor component for longer than you would normally.

Neither approach is more valid than the other but for my money, I've spent less doing it with two tiers along with pulling cat5 wherever I could.

Exactly !!! Say ur one smart dud.

Oops sorry about that ..... I meant DUDE

I've been called a dud in nicer places than this.