DPC3825 or CGN2

[Gurkamal]

Which one of these gateway modems are better in terms of the router part?

The range on my CGN2 isn't as bad as everyone says it is for me, as it is actually stronger and faster than my cisco wrt120n.

What I'd like to know is though, is the wifi stronger on the DPC3825, or on the CGN2?

I don't want to birdge it and use another router, so I'd like to just have a gateway modem. 

***edited labels***

[TeDD13]

Both of those gateways have quite basic router functions and you are better of using them in bridge mode. Moreover, they use custom Rogers firmware which changes and disables some of the original functions and there is no way you can safely update firmware. As both myself and the majority of users in this forum I highly recommend you to "bridge" your gateway and pair it with a good router.

P.S.. I did not have a chance to test wireless range on CGN2 but wireless range in Cisco 3825 is absolutely terrible.

[FormerMember]

TeDD13, there are also numerous posts both on these forums and elsewhere on-line about the extremely poor range on the CGN2 as well. Poor range and dropped connections seem to be a fact of life with any D3 gateway modem from Rogers. The sooner Rogers deals with this issue and provides something better, as in authorizing a good stand alone D3 modem, the sooner they will satisfy the needs of their customers!

[Gdkitty · Accepted solution]

as stated are both normaly are poorer than a 3rd party plugged in in bridged mode. At least a newer stand alone router.

I did quite a bit of research, looking into gateways of all brands used amongst cable providers across North America. General consensus. They all suck compared to the 3rd party. So it's not just Rogers 😞

But, if you do want to use one, of the two, the Hitron does get SLIGHTLY better reviews.

[TeDD13]

IHR, I have been using Cisco DPC3825 for almost 7 months now and never had any single dropped connection. I find this gateway operating very reliable in bridged mode. So, as a "modem" Cisco 3825 is quite good.

[Gdkitty]

He is not arguing the fact that as a modem it works well.  All 3 of them actualy appear to do so in that regards.

The point is, that they advertise these, as a full functioning, well funtioning wireless router included, which it isnt.
And that is what we are paying for.
That there are other stand along D3 modems available on the market, that we should have an option of using one of these, as the modem costs were slightly lower.

[FormerMember]

Of course Gdkitty knows exactly what I meant - he has read enough of my posts on this topic! 

TeDD13, you stated that the Cisco had terrible range. The fact is that if customers use the modem in gateway mode, they not only suffer from poor range, but might have dropped connections (with their wifi) as well. The fact that you are using it in bridge mode overcomes these shortfalls. No one disputes that the gateway modems work well as a modem - but as a router they are terrible.

The two points I have been trying to make is that customers should not have to bridge the gateways - not if they worked as advertised - which they don't! Secondly, if Rogers cannot supply a gateway that works as advertised they should allow the option of a good stand alone D3 modem. 

One last point! In my humble opinion, it is easier for the average customer to hook up a stand alone D3 modem with their own 3rd party router than it is to figure out the bridging process when you hook up your gateway and discover that the wifi on it is terrible. 

[Gdkitty]

At bare minimum at this point, they should be supplying the bridging info when they hand out the gateway.

Again not a fix, and they should be supplying a modem, but at lest supplying the info upfront.
A "of you wish to use your own router as before follow these instructions"

[FormerMember]

---

@Gdkitty wrote:
At bare minimum at this point, they should be supplying the bridging info when they hand out the gateway.

---

The would be nice on their part, but I do no think it is going to happen because it would be an admission on Rogers part that the built-in router is deficient and I don't think that Rogers really wants to admit that their equipment is sub par!!

[Kumanan1]

How was Hiltron Modem is it better than Cisco modems?  I h eard there are some issues with it.

[Gdkitty]

As a ROUTER, they are all sort of sub par, as mentioned futher up in the thread.
SLIGHTLY better maybe than the cisco.. but not much.
Most of the problems with them are fixed via a patch which is available.

The MAIN point of going to the new modems, is that they are required for the newer plans.
The CISCO are only 8 channel.. but the Hitron are a 24.

This helps lessen the chance of any congestion type slow downs, etc.

(think of it adding more lanes to the road.. less chance of slowdown when a lot of people are on)