Bert

You need a rig that can produce 540 FPS to be able to take advantage of that, even with a 4090 or 7900XTX you will not see those framerates. Also the difference is getting smaller every time you up the Hz rating: 60 Hz = 16,6ms between frames 120 Hz = 8,3ms between frames 240 Hz = 4,2ms between frames 360 Hz = 2,7ms between frames 540 Hz = 1,9ms between frames For the amount of manipulation happening from the game, ie active latency balancing and skill based matchmaking I would not invest in anything over average hardware as it's simply pointless. Even stuff like routers. Average home net has 1ms between device and router and for a fiber connection you have 1ms between device and ISP node. Do you really think QoS and all this BS matters if the game simply matches your latency in lobby to the other players? You can't even tell if you are playing on a 10ms, 30 ms or 50ms server in game due to the lag compensation systems.

No opposite way around. He wants to keep BT wifi. So what you will end up with is: 1. Connect XR1000 WAN to BT LAN 2. If BT Hub has the option, place the XR1000 in DMZ so you avoid double nat That should fix it. The firewall on a XR1000 is still active so you need to keep DHCP etc running. You could switch off the XR1000 wifi alltogether, but you can also use it if you wish with a different SSID.

I don't use QoS on 1Gbit up/down with XR500 as it literally does nothing. When a packet is send, it reaches the traffic queues and there is no wait time unless your connection is saturated. There is something a need to run a bandwidth limit because the physical limit for a 1Gbit card is 940 mbit, so if you tell the router that you have 1000 mbit available the traffic shaper goes out of whack. On my 600/40 connection with XR700 I do use QoS due to the low upload speed. Also note that QoS only really works on your upload side. You do not have control over packets getting send from the internet. You also have no control over packets traveling to the server once they leave your router. You can only control the little piece between your router and gaming device.

I tried updating from .134 and that seems to do the trick. I was at a DumaOS 3 beta previously. going intermediate firmware -> RC10 -> RC14 gave issues. Maybe updating needs to be done from .134 and not from a previous beta.

Sorry Fraser not going to try again. It doesn't even let me play a game, I get disconnected all the time. The pingplotter result is simply visualizing what happens. Both are also on the same interval so .134 should be similar if interval was the issue.

This RC14 firmware performs really bad. Base latency is lower over the 134 version but I get a huge amount of latency variation playing on PC. This and it randomly disconnects me, I can barely finish 1 DMZ or WZ game without being thrown out of the game. Flashed back 134 and everything is good again. This is with QoS disabled. See screenshot, after the last packetloss I am switching back to .134

RSS queues depends on the CPU you are using. Ideally you should keep the maximum amount of queues equal to the amount of physical cores you have available. For modern day PC's it's a non issue though as a single core would be able to handle the datastream for a 1Gbit NIC.

I am supposed to have a VOIP service from my provider as well but it's not even connected. I just use mobile and the only people that called me on that VOIP phone were telemarketeers LOL.

Depending on what setup they run you might be able to use a separate Voip hub. Usually the way it is set up if that your VOIP and internet come in over different VLAN's. You would need a managed switch between your router and ONT. Then send the internet VLAN to your router and the VOIP VLAN to your VOIP hub. But you need credentials etc to set it up.

At 1Gbit up and down you should switch off QoS entirely unless you use a huge amount of bandwidth. QoS is the thing that is probably least understood by gamers but it does for sure sell routers. If you are not reaching the maximum of your connection then there is no packets stuck in the queue and QoS will not do anything for you. Also say you have 500mbit. You go testing bufferbloat, adjust it to 400mbit. Great but if you are using the net by yourself and your average traffic use while gaming is 1mbit instead of downloading stuff, here QoS will again do nothing for you. QoS actually slows down your traffic in terms of latency. Generally this little bit of latency is accepted by getting constant performance in return. A household with kids going off a 100/10 connection or so needs QoS but not at 1000/1000. And yes for 1Gbit SQM you need a lot of CPU power. As far as I know only x86-64 routers are capable of doing this at this present time.

If we are talking milliseconds I doubt you are going to see much of a difference. Consoles are not optimized for very low latency networking. There is lots of people here tinkering with QoS / router settings thinking that it will make a difference while in reality this is all per hop basis. They forget that their own switches add latency and your packets travel to the server over 10 hops which don't care about your QoS, and have a variable load depending on the time of day. Plus processing power of DSL and Cable modems generally poses a bigger bottleneck over the current gen dual core and quad core routers. On my PS4's I typically can't tell much of a difference between the XR routers. Also with gaming consoles you are limited in other area's such as a lower screen refresh rate and input lag from your controllers. That makes all this a moot point. As for the last bit. People just want a "turn-key" solution. And generally the market this caters for is on a limited butget, you can see that on sales figures for the previous flagship, the XR700. Super advanced but the $500 price put people off. If power and speed is required it's much simpler to build your own router on a x86-64 box than to use a consumer grade system. The more tech savy crowd could easily manage geo blocking themselves with the right tools, just a matter of scanning the IPs / domains the games connect to and blocking those in the firewall. What makes it time consuming is fishing out the server IP's etc, so if you buy a DumaOS device this is all taken care of. Well that is the quick version, in some games it will break your matchmaking so geofiltering does not always work well. I would say 98% of the DumaOS users are CoD players, where it actually works ok.

It has more to do with use cases than actual speed IMHO. Between my R1, XR500 and XR700 I don't feel that the OS scales well with CPU's and RAM, ie the XR700 does not respond that much faster over the others. As for WAN speed at 400mbit none of these are breaking a sweat. It's like a windows PC, if you have a 10 year old i7 and put it next to a current gen i7 you barely feel the difference if you're just surfing the web. XR500 is probably the best all round router. Simply because the code/firmware has recieved the most updates. It's actually a R7800 with different software. R2 has most features but seems to be lacking a bit in it's wifi strength. Currently not offering WAN side VLAN tagging which can be a nuissance for fiber users that want to do away with their ISP hub. If you need AX wifi then the XR1000 fits the bill. Personally would not upgrade from AC Wave 2 over it unless you specifically have clients that can use this. Otherwise Wifi 6E seems to be more interesting. XR700 provides the lowest amount of latency possible provided you have the other equipment, PC's with 10Gbit networking cards and a SFP+ connection to the router. That's on paper though since in games you won't notice this. The CPU used is one that is normally found in lower end NAS systems. That's also the key feature to this router, it's extra features are more suited to media streaming than gaming. You can connect a dual port NAS to the link aggregation ports and feed your wired + wifi clients or use it as a NAS by feeding it with USB drives and connecting over SFP+. If you just use this as a standalone router it has no advantages over the XR500 since it has the same wifi specs, outside of AD wifi which no clients use, and the more stable and extra features in XR500 3.0 make it more attractive. Misunderstood product, people think you can run 10Gbit WAN but the CPU is too weak to route this (even with professional equipment with X86-64 CPU's routing + firewall 10Gbit is a challenge never mind running advanced QoS) Key point however is that these are all routers meant to be used as a 'all in one device' in a home setting with a mix of maybe 10-20 wired and wifi clients. And in that area they all have their niche. What always confuses me is the different feature sets. Like my XR700 has VPN but no adblocker, I believe my XR500 does have both. Some better consistency in this would help a lot tbh. Saying that, on my 600/600 fiber connection I was still using the R1 + DumaOS 3 because I don't use wifi on that particular connection and QoS is also not needed. It leaves a nice little footprint and can be put under your desk or tucked away in other places. Just it doesn't work well with PPPoE so you always need a ISP router in front of it, something that wasn't necessary with the XR500.

Actually wondering why you switched a XR700 for a XR1000. The XR700 wifi is quite solid and in terms of raw power and connectivity is actually ahead of the XR1000. XR1000 is more the follow up to the XR500 rather than the XR700.

Mine is: Community name: BertAnsink Email: [email protected]

LOL this. I signed up on day 1 for the XR500 beta. Nothing. But apperantly everybody who signed up last week and now asks gets bumped.