I had my TP Link Deco P9 (Wi-Fi 5 from 2019) system with three mesh nodes since 2020, but I was not thrilled with its performance. In 2022, I complained to TP Link support, but they did not help, so now I compared the Deco P9 to a MSI RadiX AXE6600 (Wi-Fi 6e from 2023) and TP-Link Archer AX6000 (Wi-Fi 6 from 2018). In 2020, I paid $250 for the Deco. In 2024, I bought the MSI used for $133.89 and the Archer for $63.49. Do not confuse the RadiX AXE6600 (Wi-Fi 6e) with AX6000 (Wi-FI 6): even Google Search mixes them up.
| Attribute | MSI RadiX AXE6600 | TP-Link AX6000 | TP-Link Deco P9 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brand | MSI | TP-Link | TP-Link |
| Model | RadiX AXE6600 | AX6000 | Deco P9 |
| Paid Price | $133.89 in 2024, Amazon used | $63.49 in 2024, ebay | $250.00 in 2020, new |
| Wi-Fi Generation | 6E | 6 | 5 |
| Beamforming | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Streams | 2/2/4 | 4/4/0 | MU-MIMO |
| Antennas | 6 | 8 | 2 |
| 2.5 Gbps LAN Ports | 1 | 1 | 0 per unit |
| 1 Gbps LAN Ports | 4 | 8 | 2 per unit |
For preformance testing, the Wi-Fi systems were set to AP mode and hard wired over 1 Gbps Ethernet to a Belkin RT3200 running OpenWRT, functioning as an iperf3 server to test LAN performance not confounded by an ISP. The MSI was set to 80 MHz on the 5 GHz band (the maximum) and 160 MHz on the 6 GHz band. The Archer was set to 80 MHz on the 5 GHz band. The Archer can do 160 MHz, though the setting was hard to find, and in other testing, it did not make a big difference at close range.
With iperf3 in default mode, the client sends (i.e., uploads): I call this forward mode. In reverse mode, the client receives (i.e., downloads). I used the PingTools Android app for iperf3 and PingMon app for ICMP ping.
The network client was usually a Samsung Galaxy S24 (Wi-Fi 6e) smartphone, but a few tests were done with a Galaxy A15 (Wi-Fi 5), which is a much cheaper phone.
Performance at close range
I began by testing at close range, which represents the ideal scenario for Wi-Fi. In this test, the Deco P9 was a satellite hard-wired to the primary Deco.
Here the MSI RadiX AXE6600 outperformed the others on the 5 GHz band, and as you would expect, the MSI performance on the 6 GHz band was even better than the MSI on 5 GHz.
Strangely, the cheaper Galaxy A15 had much better latency than the Galaxy S24, though the Galaxy S24 performed better than the Galaxy A15 on bandwidth tests, which is expected because the Galaxy S24 supports a newer generation of Wi-Fi.
| Access Point | Band | Client | Ping avg ms | iperf forward Mbps< | iperf reverse Mbps |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSI RadiX AXE6600 | 6 GHz | Galaxy S24 | 16 | 777 | 909 |
| MSI RadiX AXE6600 | 5 GHz | Galaxy S24 | 18 | 578 | 716 |
| TP-Link Archer AX6000 | 5 GHz | Galaxy S24 | 17 | 617 | 760 |
| MSI RadiX AXE6600 | 5 GHz | Galaxy a15 | 3 | 314 | 338 |
| TP-Link Archer AX6000 | 5 GHz | Galaxy a15 | 4 | 334 | 312 |
| Deco P9 | 5 GHz | Galaxy a15 | 4 | 277 | 289 |
| Deco P9 | 5 GHz | Galaxy S24 | 16 | 307 | 472 |
Indoors, far away
Next, I tested with the phones in a part of the house with poor network coverage. I limited testing to 5 GHz because this location has a desktop computer that uses only 5 GHz.
In a reversal from the close-range testing, the TP-Link Archer outperformed the other access points.
| Access Point | Band | Ping Avg MS | Iperf Forward (Mbps) | Iperf Reverse (Mbps) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSI RadiX AXE6600 | 6 GHz | 27 | 78 | 199 |
| MSI RadiX AXE6600 | 5 GHz | 37 | 30 | 34 |
| TP-Link Archer AX6000 | 5 GHz | 18 | 94 | 318 |
| TP-Link Deco P9 | 5 GHz | 19 | 41 | 70 |
Outdoor
My final test was outdoors where I use a 2.4 GHz camera and 5 GHz phones, so I tested all bands.
I was surprised the 6 GHz worked outside, and it was still fast. The Archer outperformed the other APs on the 2.4 GHz band, and like in the last test, also on the 5 GHz band.
| Access Point | Band | Ping Avg MS | iperf Forward (Mbps) | iperf Reverse (Mbps) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSI RadiX AXE6600 | 6 GHz | 261 | 558 | |
| MSI RadiX AXE6600 | 5 GHz | 67 | 38 | 228 |
| TP-Link Archer AX6000 | 5 GHz | 20 | 303 | 431 |
| MSI RadiX AXE6600 | 2.4 GHz | 36 | 6 | 21 |
| TP-Link Archer AX6000 | 2.4 GHz | 38 | 28 | 22 |
| TP-Link Deco P9 | 2.4 GHz | 37 | 8 | 17 |
Other thoughts
The MSI RadiX AXE6600 has a good web interface for viewing system information and changing settings, but the MSI app never logged in for me. When my netmask was 255.0.0.0 the MSI would go into a loop, using all memory, and invoking the OOM killer, so I changed the netmask as a workaround. The MSI made 172800 DNS queries per day, which is excessive.
The Archer's Tether app is spartan with little information and few settings. The Archer has much more info and settings available through its web interface than the Tether app. While the Deco app is the better than Tether, I was annoyed by the slow refresh rates and the lack of a time series display for the network usage.
The MSI 6 GHz band performed well outside and throughout the house, so it makes a credible use case as a high-performance backhaul for Wi-Fi 6e mesh systems.
Achieving gigabit performance on these Wi-Fi systems was rare, so it makes a case against paying for high speed ISPs faster than gigabit. Devices like the Galaxy A13 could not even use half of a gigabit Internet plan.
Conclusion
Despite its age, I decided to keep the TP-Link Archer and sell the Deco P9 and MSI RadiX because the Archer performed best throughout the house and outdoors. It was a surprise that a single device, the Archer, could outperform the three units of the Deco's mesh system, and the Archer was also the oldest, outperforming the newest, which was the MSI. For me, consistent performance across my house and outdoors was more important than fastest speeds at close range. I discounted performance on the 6 GHz band (MSI) because few of my devices have a 6 GHz band: many of my devices are IoT devices that support only 2.4 GHz, while other devices are Wi-Fi 4 and Wi-Fi 5 on 5 GHz. The Archer has more than enough bandwidth to support my DSL ISP.
