Issues with Nighthawk X6 CFW
Issues with Nighthawk X6 CFW
Hello everyone, I've been experimenting with CFW on my Netgear R8000 (Nighthawk X6) lately. Back when our ISP switched to gigabit internet, the router worked well and I faced almost no problems. About a week ago, I started experiencing issues while playing a game on PC—specifically, it couldn't establish an open NAT configuration. I tried CFW (Tomato) and adjusted the settings, which helped get the NAT working again. However, a few days later I encountered another problem when checking LAN speeds on my desktop; it capped at around 500 Mbps. After posting on forums, searching online, and even trying the CFW version from the site itself, I still couldn't resolve the issue. Over the past week, I've tried other firmwares like dd-wrt and Kong Mod, but the same speed ceiling persists. It seems the problem might be related to CFW not leveraging hardware acceleration, which could explain why only Netgear's built-in firmware achieves such speeds.
Now I'm considering alternatives: building a custom PFSense box using my existing Xeon X5650 board, or switching to a small gigabit switch and using the router just as an access point. I really appreciate the flexibility of Tomato and don't want to revert to the original Netgear setup. My main goal is to maintain my gigabit LAN performance. TL;DR: Should I aim for a PFSense solution, use the X6 as an AP or switch, or explore other CFW tweaks?
I always prefer pfSense over standard residential routers because of its capabilities. You can set up the X6 as an access point; most routers work well with this, though I’ve found some ASUS models needed DHCP port triggering or forwarding to get IPs from non-pooled DHCP ranges through WiFi. Try it and if you can’t obtain an IP via WiFi but do get one on the LAN ports, enable DHCP trigger/forwarding. In my last post I noted the hardware accelerator might be disabled, pushing everything to the main cores which could cause a bottleneck. It seems the firmware lacks header data offloading, large receive offloading, and checksum offloading—possibly due to a bug or missing feature. Looks like you already have the hardware; stick with Intel network interfaces and use pfSense for better driver support.
I’m considering constructing a router myself but the main question is how it would function without one—just a switch and WAPs. I can set up a router easily, but for a short-term solution I’m thinking about using a small 4 or 8 port switch to connect my PC and other wired devices. The router would sit on that switch and manage the Wi-Fi traffic. How would that arrangement work?
Ordered an unmanaged switch for the physical connections and a wireless access point for the WiFi network. All devices will be grouped under a single flat VLAN (1). For future advanced networking or VLAN usage later, consider purchasing a managed or smart switch. ISP Modem → pfSense → Switch → Wired Clients → WiFi Access Point → WiFi clients
It seems WiFi should work on the existing router, making a separate AP unnecessary at this stage. If they move to pfSense, they can keep using this device as an access point. The issue appears to be that LAN traffic is relying on a software bridge instead of a hardware solution, causing it to reach its CPU speed limit. A switch should resolve this problem.
I told him to use the X6 as the access point... no point binning it, read my original reply.
I aimed to confirm that the current router functions adequately. The main issue appears to be its inability to switch hardware devices properly. I suggest considering pfSense, but if the existing setup meets your needs, it’s worth evaluating. The router should handle wireless access points just fine, as people often confuse the two.
Response came late, but over the weekend I reverted to the stock firmware on the router. The slow internet download was due to missing hardware acceleration. I’ll likely switch to a PFSense-style router later when setting up a server, but for now I’ll stick with the standard Netgear router. Thanks for the advice @Falconevo and @Alex Atkin UK.
This situation is quite puzzling because NAT often slows down with CFW, yet it’s not uncommon for Netgear to work well with DD-WRT for hardware acceleration. It’s odd that the Switch model was the main culprit, as such issues are usually addressed. It seems strange they didn’t add a hardware switch chip in this premium device. Still, I’d recommend pfSense if you’re dealing with similar challenges—this kind of problem often led me to try OpenWRT on x86 through a custom build, and later switch to pfSense when support ended.