A workaround at best at cost for the ones using limits.
If that was directed at me: Nope, I even created a new blank FF profile (no addons, no nothing), still the same.
Anyway, it’s solved for me I only report it so GL-inet can improve the product.
You need HW acceleration on every router/modem to get these speeds (like 2.5Gbps over a PPPoE connection), so, it’s not a “problem” with Flint 2.
C’mon…just be smart: everyone who sell router/modems has these type of marketing things.
It’s obvious that YOU CAN’T make these type of speeds under 2.4GHz network, you should also talk about Wi-Fi modulation, streams and so on.
There are no devices that can archive that speed. (I mean CLIENT device, not routers)
That’s not a Flint 2 related thing.
2 Likes
So, someone is obviosly lying? 
1 Like
There is always a difference between gross and net speed when using WiFi.
Who is lying? These speeds are under SPECIFIC condition, for example: Client must be connected to 2.4GHz should be on 4x4 TX/RX and 1024QAM and also WITHOUT any type of interference.
As you can simply see, that’s a big and optimistic case and you can’t archive that type of speeds.
The same can be done on the 5GHz frequency.
Cmon guys…before saying something you should be informed.
PS: It’s the same on EVERY router brands. (example ROG GT-AX11000 which can go up to 1148Mbps over a 4x4 TX/RX and 1024QAM modulation)
You should be able to answer who is lying, as you said those speeds advertised are obviosly not possible to reach.
Could someone from GL-iNet answer what was the “specific conditions” to reach 600 / 1148 Mbps instead of 100~140 Mbps and what they found when using 4.5.5, 4.5.6 and 4.5.7 firmwares?
1 Like
Before someone of GL.iNet could give you an answer, did you check if your device can reach that type of speeds and is enabled to use 4x4 streams and 1024QAM modulation?
Idk why we are only talking about the router and not any device.
Anyway, no one of these speeds are possible, because of interferences and other variables. We are still talking about wireless connections.
every Wifi 6 router in AC 2.4 has the same speed . this is not a bug of Flint 2 in any case . Please we need to discuss only of bugs
OK, so let GL-iNet to tell us what is possible and what they are finding when comparing 4.5.5, 4.5.6 and 4.5.7 firmwares.
2 Likes
How can they know that?
We are not under the same circumstances and interferences, so they can’t answer.
That’s a no-sense question.
This is not true and it is very easy to find reviews to prove that different euipments can reach different speeds.
On 4.5.7 firmware, the 2.4GHz network is limited to 100Mbps (20MHz) and 150Mbp (40MHz).
1 Like
Again…it’s not limited.
It depends on your wireless mode, as you posted.
I can go easily over 150Mbps at 40MHz, but it’s my SPECIFIC case.
Not sure , but i think it does work but not on the advertised speeds, i did just a speed test and went above 200mb/s on 2.4ghz for 4.5.7.
^ though im already more than happy to see these speeds occur, the reason i dont max out is maybe due to dfs, a lower tx power can also annoy you with speed in certain cases, so in my case i take it with a grain of salt until proved otherwise and it goes even faster in the future but i think that is my max.
If this wasn’t supported i would expect to go far lower max around 100mb/s.
Also when it is about upstream openwrt theres still a discussion about this to be a standard or not so this makes it also more difficult 
Show us your SPECIFIC case
And what is the sense of it?
You will see my specific case and then? You can’t reproduce my ambient tests.
Do you guys have any ideas on how wireless connection works? You can’t reproduce tests, unless you’re under a laboratory test.
OK, you don’t have anything to show.
So let GL-iNet to tell us what they are finding on their measurement.
This is what they announced:
I honestly wonder if these speeds where taken from what mediatek advertises with their chip vs what the router can do.
But especially for 802.11n I’m smh not seeing that happen on my speeds, maybe from driver reports/band speed, but not the actual speed on devices😉, these QAM rates are also discussed by OpenWrt and not considered a standard, for now its more of a trick/hack they are pulling in vendor sdks.
Some devices can work with that and some not, it makes it extra difficult to know what is what, and then you also got WED offloading which is very nice but barely affects cpu anymore which kinda make a test look nicer than what it actually is, so i also wonder where these stats are taken 
1 Like