Summary AC4000 class Broadcom-based 3x3 tri-band router with two MU-MIMO enabled 5 GHz radios.
It's been just about three years since our first review of a "tri-band" "Smart Connect" router in the form of NETGEAR's R8000 Nighthawk X6. These routers were Broadcom's attempt to combat the higher-total-throughput claims of MU-MIMO based routers when the company didn't have a MU-MIMO chipset of its own.
The market has evolved since then, with Qualcomm-based MU-MIMO moving from 4x4 to less expensive 3x3 and even 2x2 based designs. Broadcom eventually shipped its BCM4366 4x4 MU-MIMO radio SoC that appeared first in AC5300/5400 products, although not with working firmware. It took another year or so and a few device spins for Broadcom to eventually come up with working MU-MIMO. Not that all this sturm und drang around MU-MIMO matters much to the typical Wi-Fi user, since few have the multiple MU-MIMO devices required to reap any of the technology's benefit.
Which brings us to Linksys' EA9300 Max-Stream AC4000 Tri-Band Wi-Fi Router. It incorporates a new Broadcom BCM4365 3x3 MU-MIMO radio SoC--actually three of them--into a "tri-band" design intended to entice buyers with a combination of AC4000 bigger-number-on-the-box at a price below tri-band 4x4 AC5300/AC5400 products that also have MU-MIMO.
The inflated AC4000 rating breaks down into 750 Mbps in 2.4 GHz plus two times the 1625 Mbps in 5 GHz maximum link rates. These rates require a 3x3 device that also supports the non-standard 1024-QAM modulation rate to achieve them, which means only ASUS' 4x4 PCE-AC88 PCIe adapter. Most of us with newer 2x2 smartphones that support only 256-QAM in both bands will see a maximum of 400 Mbps in 2.4 GHz (if you can get 40 MHz bandwidth, 173 Mbps otherwise) and 867 Mbps in 5 GHz.
Where this leaves the EA9200 AC3200, its first tri-band router that doesn't have MU-MIMO, is apparently on the fast lane to obsolescence, since Linksys has left its MSRP at $329.99, the same as the EA9300's. (The EA9200's street price of $135 sure looks like inventory is being cleared.) So let's see if it brings anything to the party.
The EA9300 looks pretty much like the EA9500, but with six vs. eight external antennas. There are mounting screw slots on the bottom panel will allow facing the rear panel up or down. The front panel callout diagram below describes the front panel lighting.
The rear panel has two USB 3.0 ports, four Gigabit Ethernet LAN ports and one WAN port. Port aggregation is not supported, but every port has its own link and activity LEDs that should be called out in the diagram. The right side of the router sports a Wi-Fi Protected Setup (WPS) switch. There is no wireless on/off switch.
Linksys has not released the FCC internal pictures, so I opened the router after testing was done for a look. The first photo shows the top cover removed, revealing a fairly substantial heatsink that's thermally coupled to the RF can tops under it.
Stripping off all the RF can tops shows the CPU / switch section at top, 5 GHz high-band and 2.4 GHz radios at bottom left and 5 GHz low band radio at lower right. The 5 GHz high-band and 2.4 GHz radios share the left side antennas while the 5 GHz low band has the right three antennas all to itself. Note the left side radios are combined at the antenna and not in mixing circuitry on the board.
The table summarizes the key components for the EA9300, EA9200 and EA9300 routers. The EA9300 has the same Broadcom BCM4908 1.8 GHz quad-core 64 bit ARM processor as the ASUS GT-AC5300, but for much less money. BCM4908 eliminates the need for the external PCIe switch the EA9200 and EA9300 need. The CPU also contains a 2.5 Gb Ethernet port, although it's not used in the EA9300. This article has other processor details.
The EA9300 is Wi-Fi Certified and was tested with the Revision 10 wireless test process loaded with 1.1.9.181086 firmware. The router was reset to factory default, then set to Channel 6 and 40 MHz bandwidth for 2.4 GHz and Channel 40 and 80 MHz bandwidth for the low band 5 GHz radio. The high band radio was set to Channel 153, but was not tested. WPA2/AES encryption was used for all connections. The Revision 10 process still uses 20 MHz bandwidth for 2.4 GHz tests for throughput vs. range, but uses 40 MHz for peak throughput tests. These settings are enforced by the octoScope Pal test client.
The router body was centered on the test chamber turntable with all antennas vertical as shown in the photo below. The 0° position for the router had the front facing the chamber antennas. Although you see four chamber antennas in the photo, only the center two are used for throughput vs. attenuation testing, which is done with the Pal set to operate as a 2x2 AC device.
I'll be comparing the EA9300 against ASUS RT-AC5300 and GT-AC5300, both 4x4 tri-band designs and NETGEAR's 3x3 R7000P, because it also uses the BCM4365 5 GHz radio. The ASUS routers use Broadcom's good ol' 4x4 BCM4366.
The 2.4 GHz downlink profile shows the EA9300 and ASUS GT-AC5300 tracking pretty well, albeit with the EA9300 disconnecting earlier after the 45 dB test vs. the ASUS' 51 dB. The NETGEAR clearly lags the group.
2.4 GHz uplink shows all products except the EA9300 tracking relatively well. The EA9300 is the worst performer here, starting out around 20 Mbps lower, falling off more quickly and disconnecting earliest.
5 GHz downlink clearly shows something wrong with the EA9300's performance. I've been working since early June with Linksys and octoScope to try to track down the source of the problem. The BCM4365 radio SoC was suspected at first. But the NETGEAR R7000P uses the same device and clearly doesn't have a problem. This could just be an incompatibility between the QCA-based octoScope Pal test client and Broadcom's new 3x3 AC radio SoC that won't be seen in real-world use. But since the R7000P works fine, there could also be an issue in Linksys' implementation. I've told Linksys I'll retest the product if they resolve the problem.
5 GHz uplink does not show as large a throughput difference as downlink. But the EA9300 starts out lower than the other three and joins the NETGEAR and ASUS RT-AC5300 at the 18 dB test and tracks down with them from there.
The octoScope Pal test client reported a maximum 2.4 GHz link rate of 600 Mbps only during the peak uplink test. Maximum observed rates during the 5 GHz tests were mostly the expected 1300 Mbps. These represent maximum rates for 256 QAM; the octoPal client does not support 1024 QAM.
I don't put much value on peak rates in the Router Ranker algorithm and neither should you, because they are so seldom achieved in real world use.
As of this review, the Router Ranker slots the EA9300 at #3, behind both 4x4 ASUS tri-band routers, the GT-AC5300 in the #1 berth and RT-AC5300 at #2. But at around $100 cheaper than both ASUSes, the EA9300 currently has the best price / performance of the relatively small number of products tested in the Revision 10 process.
The main value the EA9300 brings to the table over other 3x3 tri-band products is its more powerful quad-core 1.8 GHz 64 bit ARM CPU. It will help the router better keep up when hit with a lot of wired and wireless traffic. As noted earlier, if you are considering a Linksys "tri-band" router and can't or don't want to cough up the extra $30 for the EA9500, you'll be much better off with it than the three-year old EA9200, which I suspect could soon be removed from Linksys' lineup.
I hope Linksys can resolve the 5 GHz downlink low throughput problem; it casts a shadow on an otherwise good performing router. I'll be sure to update this review if they do.