V2801RGW RTL9602C

Stock firmware against OpenWrt on the SAME unit of this model. Every pair charted below was measured with the same instrument, at the same operating point -- that is the condition for appearing on a chart at all. A pair whose two halves were taken with different instruments, or at operating points that cannot be held together, is not charted: each figure keeps its qualifiers in the dated artifact these pages are generated from, and the certificate publishes the two of them as separate, individually attributed rows rather than as a difference. Only paired figures appear in these performance charts. Missing or incomparable halves are named without publishing standalone values; the dated artifacts and certificate retain their measurements. The external received-signal and WiFi stability tables list each available measurement independently and mark missing readings.

← all ported devices

Two frame sizes are published here, 60 B and 1400 B, and both as bandwidth on the cable: megabits per second counted the way the wire carries them, each frame plus its checksum, preamble and inter-frame gap (L1). Measured the same way at both sizes, every wired bar reads against the same gigabit link, so a 60 B bar and a 1400 B bar can be compared directly. Whether a given bar is AT the link's capacity or far below it is what the bar itself says, and the caption claims nothing about which is which. WiFi figures have no cable framing and are counted at the frame itself (L2). Every size the suite measures, and every qualifier each figure was measured with, stays in the dated artifact these pages are generated from.

Bandwidth, 60 B frames Mbps (cable, L1)

Higher is better: more megabits per second.

4 of these 12 points are drawn but NOT compared: stock's figure is a LOWER BOUND -- it is bounded by the generator, not by the device -- so it establishes a floor and not a magnitude. Both figures stand exactly as they were measured; what is withheld is their difference.

8 of the drawn bars are LOWER BOUNDS, a floor and not a magnitude: stock firmware PPPoE CHAP WAN->LAN (174 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); OpenWrt PPPoE CHAP WAN->LAN (180 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); stock firmware PPPoE CHAP+VLAN WAN->LAN (152 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); OpenWrt PPPoE CHAP+VLAN WAN->LAN (152 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); stock firmware PPPoE PAP WAN->LAN (175 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); OpenWrt PPPoE PAP WAN->LAN (151 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); stock firmware PPPoE PAP+VLAN WAN->LAN (151 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); OpenWrt PPPoE PAP+VLAN WAN->LAN (155 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device). The figure stands as measured; nothing is subtracted from it.

Bandwidth, 1400 B frames Mbps (cable, L1)

Higher is better: more megabits per second.

12 of these 12 points are drawn but NOT compared: stock's figure is a LOWER BOUND -- its own producer recorded it as one -- so it establishes a floor and not a magnitude; stock's figure is a LOWER BOUND -- it is bounded by the generator, not by the device -- so it establishes a floor and not a magnitude. Both figures stand exactly as they were measured; what is withheld is their difference.

24 of the drawn bars are LOWER BOUNDS, a floor and not a magnitude: stock firmware DHCP LAN->WAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); OpenWrt DHCP LAN->WAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); stock firmware DHCP WAN->LAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); OpenWrt DHCP WAN->LAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); stock firmware DHCP+VLAN LAN->WAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); OpenWrt DHCP+VLAN LAN->WAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); stock firmware DHCP+VLAN WAN->LAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); OpenWrt DHCP+VLAN WAN->LAN (992 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); stock firmware PPPoE CHAP LAN->WAN (999 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); OpenWrt PPPoE CHAP LAN->WAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); stock firmware PPPoE CHAP WAN->LAN (813 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); OpenWrt PPPoE CHAP WAN->LAN (815 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); stock firmware PPPoE CHAP+VLAN LAN->WAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); OpenWrt PPPoE CHAP+VLAN LAN->WAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); stock firmware PPPoE CHAP+VLAN WAN->LAN (794 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); OpenWrt PPPoE CHAP+VLAN WAN->LAN (786 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); stock firmware PPPoE PAP LAN->WAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); OpenWrt PPPoE PAP LAN->WAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); stock firmware PPPoE PAP WAN->LAN (817 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); OpenWrt PPPoE PAP WAN->LAN (779 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); stock firmware PPPoE PAP+VLAN LAN->WAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); OpenWrt PPPoE PAP+VLAN LAN->WAN (1000 Mbps, its own producer recorded it as a lower bound); stock firmware PPPoE PAP+VLAN WAN->LAN (787 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device); OpenWrt PPPoE PAP+VLAN WAN->LAN (793 Mbps, bounded by the generator, not by the device). The figure stands as measured; nothing is subtracted from it.

WiFi, 2.4 GHz Mbps (L2)

Higher is better: more megabits per second.

Bars on this band: stock firmware, OpenWrt. Operating point: 2g/20MHz/HT/CCMP.

4 of these 4 points are drawn but NOT compared: stock's figure is a LOWER BOUND -- it is bounded by the air, not by the device -- so it establishes a floor and not a magnitude. Both figures stand exactly as they were measured; what is withheld is their difference.

8 of the drawn bars are LOWER BOUNDS, a floor and not a magnitude: stock firmware WiFi -> WAN -- 60 B (10.3 Mbps, bounded by the air, not by the device); OpenWrt WiFi -> WAN -- 60 B (12.4 Mbps, bounded by the air, not by the device); stock firmware WAN -> WiFi -- 60 B (9.10 Mbps, bounded by the air, not by the device); OpenWrt WAN -> WiFi -- 60 B (7.42 Mbps, bounded by the air, not by the device); stock firmware WiFi -> WAN -- 1400 B (81.6 Mbps, bounded by the air, not by the device); OpenWrt WiFi -> WAN -- 1400 B (43.0 Mbps, bounded by the air, not by the device); stock firmware WAN -> WiFi -- 1400 B (91.3 Mbps, bounded by the air, not by the device); OpenWrt WAN -> WiFi -- 1400 B (80.1 Mbps, bounded by the air, not by the device). The figure stands as measured; nothing is subtracted from it.

Time from kernel start until every service is up s

Lower is better: fewer seconds until every service answers.

Seconds from kernel start; the bootloader is not included. Not counted: GPON, SSH, 5 GHz WiFi. The two figures count different services.

Signal received by the lab WiFi client

Higher is better: a reading closer to 0 dBm is a stronger signal (-21 dBm is stronger than -30 dBm).

Signal received by the external WiFi test client, in dBm, from the ONU. This is received signal strength, not the device's transmit power. Compare readings only with the same client, position and operating conditions. Missing means no external reading is stored; each device page names the last attempt and its error.

2.4 GHz

Memory MiB

Lower used memory is better: more RAM is left free.

One idle snapshot per firmware, on a common scale. Both bars include all fitted RAM, including memory outside the kernel-managed total.

CPU clock MHz

Higher maximum is better for CPU-bound work; dynamic scaling spends less at rest.

At rest idle

Lower is better: fewer timer interrupts and a cooler SoC spend less at rest; the DDR refresh must follow the temperature.

No power meter on the rig: the SoC temperature is the only outside witness.

Image footprint MiB

Smaller is better: less flash taken by the image.

Weighed with the board unplugged -- a property of the firmware, not a reading taken from a running device. Compressed is the root filesystem image as each firmware ships it (ours squashed from the staged tree with the image's own options, the vendor's read from its flash bank); uncompressed is the bytes of regular files in the extracted tree, the same rule on both.

No comparable stock/OpenWrt pair is available for: Installed, by package; Web UI closure, installed; Packages installed; Files belonging to the web UI. Standalone values remain in the dated artifacts.

WiFi stability

Lower is better for loss and delay; higher is better for the download and upload rates.

Round trips from the first WiFi client to the WAN-side lab target. Idle download and upload are that client's own maximum TCP rate on the same band and cipher. Under load, a second client on the same AP downloads or uploads, or the first client itself downloads; the rate that load achieved is shown beside the round trips measured under it. Loss is packet loss; p95 is delay in milliseconds. A dash means that metric is unavailable; n/a marks the direction a load row does not run.

Stock and OpenWrt are listed for each scenario. Regression: FAIL when mean RTT is more than 30 percent worse than stock. For loss, the allowed increase is the largest of 30 percent of stock loss, one packet, or 2 percentage points. The same unit and radio settings are required. Lab clients are less than 1 m from the ONUs; these measurements do not validate range.

Idle

Another client downloading or uploading

The client itself downloading

Missing data, and why

Every benchmark point and published quantity of this device that has no usable figure: its state, the date of the last attempt and an excerpt of why that attempt produced nothing. A missing figure is never drawn as a zero.