Netgear R6300 review
A promising start for 802.11ac, but with few compatible devices, it won’t revolutionise your home network
Review Date: 1 Oct 2012
Reviewed By: Jonathan Bray
Price when reviewed: £150 (£180 inc VAT)
Features & Design
Value for Money
The transition from 802.11g to faster 802.11n Wi-Fi was among the slowest, most drawn-out upgrades in the history of technology. It was only officially ratified by the IEEE standards committee in 2009, but before that, we had years of unofficial “pre-n” and “draft-n” products released as manufacturers and consumers lost patience.
Thankfully, it looks as if its successor – 802.11ac – will go through the process far more quickly. Although still at the “draft 2” stage, it’s predicted the standard will be finalised by the end of 2012, with manufacturers already delivering new hardware. This Netgear R6300 cable router is the first supporting the new standard we’ve seen.
The 802.11ac standard is intended to boost wireless speeds and range. It only operates in the 5GHz band but is backwards-compatible with 802.11n devices, which means if you buy an R6300 now you’ll be able to connect any dual-band laptop, smartphone and tablet over 5GHz just as you would any regular dual-band 802.11n router. The Netgear R6300 also sports a 2.4GHz radio, allowing concurrent 802.11n and 802.11ac connections.
Over 802.11ac, the potential speed gains are significant. This Netgear R6300 router has a theoretical maximum throughput of up to 1,300Mbits/sec, almost three times the 450Mbits/sec claim you’ll see on the fastest 802.11n routers, and there’s also headroom in the standard for speeds far in excess of this.
These speeds are achieved in two key ways. First, the 802.11ac has support for wider channels. While 802.11n supported a maximum channel bandwidth of 40MHz, 802.11ac goes right up to 160MHz. Second, the standard supports the use of more MIMO (multiple input and multiple output) spatial streams, up to eight from four in 802.11n. With a single spatial giving a maximum possible throughput of 433Mbits/sec on an 80MHz channel, there’s potential for throughput of up to 6.93Gbits/sec.
That’s the theory, but as we’ve found over the years, such figures are rarely achievable in real-world use. So we set about putting the R6300, which supports 80MHz channels and three simultaneous streams, through our usual battery of wireless tests.
Does it actually work? PC Pro has reviewed Netgear routers in the past and once on sale they've presented owners with many, MANY, issues.
I owned the N600 and it would not hold a stable connection.
As with ALL Netgear devices wait at least a month, check the Netgear support forums and if you're feeling lucky, then buy the device.
By rhythm on 1 Oct 2012
Thanks for the review
Thanks for the detailed review of this new generation of upcoming routers. I really hope that your prediction of 802.11ac being ratified by the end of 2012 is correct. It would be refreshing if the IEEE were to ratify it so soon.
The official timeline at
Unfortunately shows a very different picture.
I look forward to such devices being available.
By Jimbo762 on 1 Oct 2012
By JohnHo1 on 2 Oct 2012
But REAL transfer speeds
I am deeply sceptical.
My router has official speeds of 108Mbps, but I rarely achieve a twentieth of that.
I suspect the numbers here will be as meaningless.
But maybe I'll get 10Mbps.
By Tony_Yeah on 4 Oct 2012
Doomed to fail
As if the available channels in the wifi spectrum (both 2.4 and 5GHz) were not congested enough, now we have not only MIMO triple-channel use, but four times the channel width . .. anyone else see a problem here?
Collision-based technologies such as wifi suffer badly from co-channel interference, which the numpties at ISPs seem to either fail to understand or to ignore completely - e.g. BT and its 3 wifi networks on the same channel (by default) in the same router!
This router seems capable of occupying virtually the whole available spectrum by itself, which will only make the problem orders of magnitude worse, not to mention the "elecrosmog" issue that was rather patronisingly covered in a recent issue by someone who clearly doesn't understand the physics of the matter.
By onanymouse on 4 Oct 2012
- Europol warns: public Wi-Fi isn't safe
- Privacy groups challenge Facebook's WhatsApp buy
- IDC: iPad intertia opens door for Windows tablets
- Chip breakthrough to eliminate checkout queues
- Rivals put on notice as Spotify snaps up The Echo Nest
- Windows 8.1 Update 1 leaks via Microsoft's website
- Bitcoin "founder" says: you've got the wrong man
- Has bitcoin creator been found?
- HTC Desire 310: more competition for the Moto G
- Mozilla questions why Dell charges £16 to install Firefox
- Move over Delia: IBM Watson is cooking tonight
- Eric Schmidt on the double-edged smartphone: friend and foe
- Getty joins the race to the bottom
- Hour of Code: five steps to learn how to code
- Sony Xperia Z2 Tablet review: first look
- Sony Xperia Z2 review: first look
- Samsung Galaxy Gear 2 review: first look
- Nokia XL review: first look
- Samsung Galaxy S5 review: first look
- Nokia X review: first look
- Make the most of your mobile data
- Old-school internet scams: five that just won't die
- Bitcoin believers not worried by Mt. Gox disarray
- How to hack your car
- Small server vs cloud: which is best for SMBs?
- Block party: why do millions play Minecraft?
- What to do if you’re still on Windows XP
- Microsoft Word: top 20 secret features
- Measuring me: is your body the future of security?
- The best mobile apps for business
- Windows Server 2012 R2: how the Datacenter edition could change SMBs
- Invoices and VAT: how to set up your documents correctly
- Nexus 5 vs Samsung Galaxy S4 Active: the best phone for avoiding screen burn
- How much is a social user worth?
- The key to choosing a secure password
- Thunderbolt Bridge: a fast Mac migration tool
- Should you advertise on Twitter?
- How to track a lost smartphone
- Self-publishing success: the best way to sell your book
- 1.6TB SSD: why would you need one?