Real World Performance - Amplifi HD - 3.4.3


  • I've been using Amplifi since it came out, and seen a lot of updates come through with a lot of different feedback saying it doesn't perform or can't sustain gbit, etc. etc.

    I updated my internet today from 300 Mbps to 1000 Mbps (940 is what they advertise due to overhead and since raw link speed isn't possible). So if there are any doubts left as to whether or not Amplifi can technically still perform, see attached.

    Wired: 981.2
    Wireless: Between 600-700, but that's more complicated.
    Devices: 53 + 1 active router to router teleport

    I'm not saying that folks don't have issues - just saying it's not necessarily the hardware as it's fully capable of doing what they say it does if everything else is working properly as well.

    Also, this isn't through the wireless extenders, which I don't have good luck with so I switched to wired backhaul to another HD.

    Hope this helps anyone with problems see that it CAN work. Just may have to consider issues outside the box.

    Edit: Removed one of the screen shots that showed beta options since this isn't the beta forum.

    0_1607221190406_IMG_0021.jpeg
    2_1607221127126_Screen Shot 2020-12-05 at 8.15.08 PM.png 0_1607221127123_Screen Shot 2020-12-05 at 8.13.24 PM.png


  • Hi @Michael-Eckhoff - that is a nice testimony for your ISP in your region, but if you have been using AmpliFi since it came out then you know that it absolutely did not support gigabit speeds until Hardware NAT was implemented and that feature is not universally compatible with all ISP connections

    So yes, the bare metal hardware can possibly support gigabit speeds if HW NAT can be utilized, but why discount the importance of ISP connection/infrastructure compatibility and the firmware?

    What's the point of gigabit capable hardware without the controlling firmware exposing it?
    Was the Switch Buffers beta option purely software, or also hardware related?

    The gray area of when a router from a different maker can provide gigabit service in a particular setup and the AmpliFi cannot seems a little more complex than just saying "well, for sure it isn't the hardware"...

    EDIT: for example, App Notes for v1.13.6 - Removed Hardware NAT option in PPPoE mode (it never worked anyways)
    Our condo has FttP and multi-gigabit service options, but PPPoE is required
    Even the ISP router is more than gigabit capable with PPPoE...the AmpliFi is not
    I consider that a hardware limitation, not just firmware
    And the building is ISP locked for the first 5 years, only after can the owners' association vote to open up competition, so we can't just find a different ISP, and it's cheaper to use a different router than to move


  • @Derek-Saville

    It appears I've triggered you in demonstrating an example of a functional environment. My apologies. I guess this forum is only for posts about things that are broken, and not working.

    However, to answer your questions:

    1. Why discount the importance of ISP connection/infrastructure compatibility and the firmware?

    I stated, '... if everything else is working properly'. An ISP that's doing something special that is likely not RFC compliant is not what I consider 'working properly'. There are also multiple other components that come into play when you talk about 'ISP compatibility' including the service technology (Cable, DSL, WiFi, Cellular, etc.), the customer isolation layers (PPPoE, VLANs, ATM, MPLS, etc.), where you're testing to when considering performance, if it's using CG-NAT, what your end systems stack settings are (window sizes, MSS, MTU), what application you're using and how it's feeding the network layer (application buffers), delay, jitter, and the list goes on. I've worked in network performance on a global network for over 25 years, and short of the impact of QoS (which only applies when you go to drop a frame anyway), the first-hop router is rarely the issue.

    Re: firmware, Yes, I'm fully aware that when the device first came out, you had to use bridged mode if you wanted to get peek performance. I don't believe I 'discounted' anything. I simply didn't 'include' a history of firmware versions that are irrelevant to the point of the device being capable of performing today. I didn't write a 'history of Amplifi'. I specifically referred to version 3.4.3 and stated, '...if there are any doubts left as to whether or not Amplifi can technically still perform'. Keyword, being still - as in, it hasn't slowed down. If anything, as you have stated, it's gotten better.

    1. What's the point of gigabit capable hardware without the controlling firmware exposing it?

    Where is the firmware not exposing it? I just showed it does in a properly setup RFC compliant environment. Would this have performed the same if I put on the firmware from when I pulled it out of the box? Who knows, and I don't really care as I'm not posting this from 2016, when these rates weren't that relevant anyway.

    1. Was the Switch Buffers beta option purely software, or also hardware related?

    I don't discuss beta features in a public forum, but I will say, I did not have any beta features enabled (other than disabling IGMP snooping which has nothing to do with this).

    So again, i'm not saying everyone will have a perfect experience. I'm saying that the hardware CAN perform as advertised at Gbit speeds with the features and functionality that was promised; and that before you just jump to blaming your router; make sure you're looking end to end before ripping it out and putting in another.


  • Hi @Michael-Eckhoff - you haven't triggered anything since I am well familiar AmpliFi and how to deal with their nuances, especially when it comes to Teleport

    I will repost my edit in case it is not showing up...

    EDIT: for example, App Notes for v1.13.6 - Removed Hardware NAT option in PPPoE mode (it never worked anyways)
    Our condo has FttP and multi-gigabit service options, but PPPoE is required
    Even the ISP router is more than gigabit capable with PPPoE...the AmpliFi is not
    I consider that a hardware limitation, not just firmware
    And the building is ISP locked for the first 5 years, only after can the owners' association vote to open up competition, so we can't just find a different ISP, and it's cheaper to use a different router than to move

    You can debate all you want about the the relevance of RFC 2516 and why it followed the informational track, but PPPoE is a reality that AmpliFi cannot cope with at gigabit speeds...


  • @Derek-Saville I understand your point now that I understand you're using PPPoE as it's fairly common, but what does that have to do with a post about a functional setup that's not using PPPoE? I posted my settings for comparison. Obviously, if you're using different settings, especially if you have to disable hardware NAT, you'll get different results.

    The tone of my reply was such simply because I did not intend for this post to be a summary of other peoples problems, but simply a post about a functional setup. There are already numerous posts I'm sure about other peoples' specific issues.

    Out of curiosity, now that the Alien is out, does it have the same issues with PPPoE?

    Do other consumer routers released in 2016 support PPPoE at full Gbit?

    Just curious if there's a comparison being done between a more modern device and this one.


  • Just spent a few minutes looking at the results of a google search on "pppoe gigabit router". Clearly the issue of Gbit over PPPoE has been around for some time, and with few if any consumer solutions.


  • Hi @Michael-Eckhoff - I apologize if I took your post the wrong way and I actually wasn't meaning to argue with you either

    I read the main message as "people shouldn't complain that they can't sustain gigabit speeds because I can and here is proof that the AmpliFi can technically still perform at those speeds even today, so there is no doubt it is not the hardware which is fully capable..."

    And yes there were disclaimers about 'everything else is working properly', but what does that mean in this context?

    You also mention wireless extenders and with direct wireless you can achieve between 600-700, "but that's more complicated."

    Regarding wireless, AmpliFi have admitted even in lab conditions they cannot achieve gigabit speeds with 3 stream MCS9 @ VHT80 (out of the theoretical 1300 Mbps)...at the time I believe they reported somewhere in the 800's was the limit for packet processing

    And we know the lack of a backhaul radios essentially cuts throughput in half for each MeshPoint hop

    On personal level, I do not believe AmpliFi ever promised gigabit throughput, although the claim of being MCS9 VHT80 3 stream 1300 Mbps capable is somewhat misleading in my opinion

    And the AmpliFi having a gigabit switch capable of gigabit line rate NAT is great, but not particularly special or representative that the device is "fully technically capable of gigabit speeds", especially when its main purpose is to form a wireless mesh

    So I was trying to foster discussion about the "everything else working properly" and what is more complicated about the wireless situation (which I think people mostly care about searching these forums) where gigabit speeds are impossible, and I did a poor job of communicating that if it came across as combative


  • Hi @Matthew-Leeds - agreed, which is why I have had to stay with the ISP routers and run bridge mode, or go with much higher grade equipment, which then leads back to the what is 'consumer grade' debate

    It was a hasty edit...but something I have experienced both in Taiwan and Japan with various ISP's and buildings, and I don't actually expect AmpliFi to achieve PPPoE gigabit speeds, but that is a hardware limitation of the device
    (and that doesn't even touch on the lack of IGMP Proxy support in PPPoE mode either, which is required for local TV in many cases)

    For some reason MTU issues have come up as well and the unwillingness of AmpliFi to expose a custom MTU size basically forces one into Bridge mode in these cases

    But when the buildings provide gigabit service for "free" as part of the management fee or rent, and with no other hardline options available...


Log in to reply