Press "Enter" to skip to content

TP-Link Archer C7 vs. Netgear R6400

Are you confused in choosing between TP-Link Archer C7 and Netgear R6400? Well, you are not alone. Indeed, these two products can be very confusing at times, especially because both are dual-band routers with similar amounts of bandwidth. The price gap between them isn’t particularly large, but you may want to know that Netgear R6400 is a little bit pricier than TP-Link Archer C7 by about a couple of tens of bucks. So, what are the differences between TP-Link Archer C7 and Netgear R6400? Which is the router that holds the best value for the money?

TP-Link Archer C7 vs. Netgear R6400

1750 Mbps Total Bandwidth
Quite coincidentally, both products are dual-band routers. Each features a single 2.4 GHz and a single 5 GHz wireless signal channels operating independently and simultaneously. Also, quite interestingly, both models come with similar amounts of bandwidth. Each of them offers 450 Mbps for the 2.4 GHz frequency, 1300 Mbps for the 5 GHz frequency, so the total is 1750 Mbps. As the effect, they can give you the same maximum speeds on either channel. (Let us also see this: TP-Link Archer C7 vs. C9)

Even though they have similar amounts of bandwidth, they don’t necessarily have similar wireless performance as well. Indeed, each router has three adjustable external antennas here, and they are both suitable for medium to large-sized homes, but TP-Link Archer C7 does not support beamforming yet. The feature can significantly enhance the wireless signal strength and stability, especially for devices that are placed far from the router. With beamforming, a router will be able to focus the wireless signal projection towards every connected device, ensuring a stable and reliable connection. Due to the lack of the feature, TP-Link Archer C7 may struggle to keep up with devices that are close to the edge of its area coverage. On the other hand, Netgear R6400 already comes with implicit and explicit beamforming for the 5 GHz frequency, significantly boosting the speed and reliability of the connections on the channel.

USB 3.0
The next advantage that Netgear R6400 offers over TP-Link Archer C7 is the USB 3.0 port. The Netgear router comes with a USB 3.0 port and one USB 2.0 port, as opposed to TP-Link Archer C7’s two USB 2.0 ports. As you may have understood, USB 3.0 is a lot faster than USB 2.0. The difference is very significant, and can be crucial if you plan to attach a network-attached storage or any other device via USB to be used in the network. Using USB 3.0 can give you a much better performance than relying on USB 2.0.

Each of the two routers comes with one WAN and four LAN Gigabit Ethernet ports. They also feature various security and network control features, such as built-in firewalls and QoS functionality.

- 1.75Gbps total available bandwith, which includes 450Mbps at 2.4GHz and 1300Mbps at 5GHz
- Supports 802.11ac - The next generation of Wi-Fi, and be connected to extra devices
- Dual USB Ports to share files & media, and printer locally with networked devices or remotely via FTP server
- Privacy with Guest Network Access provides secure Wi-Fi access for guests sharing your home or office network
- IP-based Bandwidth Control makes it easier for you to manage the bandwidth of individual devices connected to the router
- One USB 3.0 Port and one USB 2.0 Port
- Beamforming + focuses Wi-Fi signals from the wireless router to Wi-Fi devices
- ReadyCLOUD USB Access allows you to enjoy personal and secure cloud access to USB storage anytime, anywhere4 Gigabit Ethernet ports
- Advanced Quality of Service (QoS)
- Parental Controls - Web filtering for all your connected d

TP-Link Archer C7 vs. Netgear R6400
So, should you pick TP-Link Archer C7 or Netgear R6400? Well, we would like to suggest you to pick Netgear R6400. Even though the bandwidth is similar, it comes with the beamforming technology, which can significantly enhance the network performance. It also features a USB 3.0 port, which can be very handy and reliable at times.

Share Button

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *