With the Archer AX3000, not to be confused with the Archer AX50, TP-Link manages to hit that current sweet spot of Wi-Fi 6.
The router delivers the performance level of existing available clients at a cost most of us won’t need to think twice. Indeed, available at Walmart at just around $130 or even lower — well, less than a third the price of the Netgear RAX200 — the new TP-Link router is more affordable than even some Wi-Fi 5 ones.
It’s important to note right away that this is not a cheap device, but you do get what you pay for. The router is pretty thin on power and Wi-Fi specs and delivered a comparatively modest performance in my testing.
At the end of the day, if you’re looking to get a new router for a small home, TP-Link Archer AX3000 still is a sensible Wi-Fi 6 buy.
Table of Contents
TP-Link Archer AX3000: A light-weight Wi-Fi 6 router
For a router that supports the latest Wi-Fi standard, the Archer AX3000 looks modest. It’s small and light and takes the shape of a typical Wi-Fi router with four external (non-removable) antennas sticking up from its back.
The router has four usual Gigabit LAN ports and one Gigabit WAN port. It has no multi-gig port, dual-WAN, Link Aggregation, and a USB 2.0 port for its NAS function. So, port-wise, the Archer AX3000 is a downer for a Wi-Fi 6 router. (Note: The Archer AX50 has USB 3.0., which is the only difference between the two.)
On the inside, the Archer AX3000 sports an Intel Home Wi-Fi WAV654 chipset capable of delivering up to 2.4 Gbps on the 5GHz band and up to 574 Mbps on the 2.4GHz band. For comparison, all other Wi-Fi 6 routers I’ve reviewed — such as the Netgear RAX200 or the Asus GT-AX11000 — have higher 4×4 Wi-Fi 6 specs, capable of delivering up to 4.8 Gbps on the 5GHz band.
In short, the Archer AX3000 is indeed a modest dual-band 2×2 Wi-Fi 6 router. However, considering there are only 2×2 clients on the market, like those Intel AX200-based adapters, it, for now, has the just-right Wi-Fi specs.
TP-Link Archer AX3000’s photos
TP-Link Archer AX3000: Standard web user interface, tons of customization
Like most other TP-Link routers, the Archer AX3000 has a web user interface that you can access via its default IP address, 192.168.0.1, or the tplinkwifi.net link. Consequently, it has the same standard setup process any experienced users will appreciate.
Easy to use mobile app
If you’re one of those millennials who do everything on a mobile phone, you can opt for the TP-Link Tether app. The app can cover both the initial setup and ongoing management but has less access to the router’s settings. If you go to the Advanced area of the app, you’ll be prompted to use the web UI instead.
The app only works within the local Wi-Fi network by default, but you can sign up for a TP-Link Cloud account to use it while you’re out and about. Using the account means you’ll link your router with TP-Link at all times, which might raise privacy concerns. The good news is you can skip that and use Dynamic DNS to create your private remote management.
Lots of settings, useful features
And Dynamic DNS is just one of many things you can do with the Archer AX3000. The router has the same level of features and customization as that of high-end routers.
For one, it has a built-in VPN server that supports both OpenVPN and PPTP protocols. There’s a HomeCare section that includes Parental Controls and QoS. The parental control feature is quite flexible, by the way.
You can block content by keywords (like “Facebook” or “porn”) and manage Internet access based on a schedule for one or a group of clients. The QoS feature is a bit simplistic. You can only enable or disable the access priority for a client.
There’s also Alexa integration. I find this a bit of a gimmick, but if you want to use voice control with the router for some reason, you can.
In all, I was able to find everything I’d like to use in a network in the Archer AX300. The only thing missing is the built-in online protection, which is not a standard feature.
In-depth Wi-Fi customization
What’s most impressive is the Wi-Fi customization part of the router’s web UI. Here, you can change the settings of the Wi-Fi channel, channel width, and the mode of the router, be it Wi-Fi 6, Wi-Fi 5, or mixed.
The Archer AX3000 is the first router I’ve seen that has the option to work only with Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) clients. However, since it’s a dual-band (and not a tri-band) router, you can’t benefit from this setting. You’ll need to use it in a mixed mode to support all legacy clients.
TP-Link Archer AX3000: Hardware specifications
|Full Name||TP-Link Archer AX3000 |
Dual-Band Gigabit Wi-Fi 6 Router
|Dimensions||10.2 × 5.3 × 1.5 in |
(260.2 x 135.0 x 38.6 mm)
|Weight||1.24 lbs (.56 kg)|
|Wi-Fi Technology||Dual-band Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) AX3000|
|5GHz Wi-Fi Specs||5GHz AX: Up to 2.4 Gbps|
Channel Width: 2×2 20/40/80/160MHz
|2.4GHz Wi-Fi Specs||2.4GHz AX: Up to 574 Mbps|
Channel Width: 2×2 20/40MHz
|Backward Compatibility||802.11a/b/g/n/ac Wi-Fi|
|Wireless Security||64/128-bit WEP, WPA/WPA2, |
|Mobile App||TP-Link Tether|
|Web User Interface||Yes|
|USB Port||1x USB 2.0|
|Gigabit Port||4x LAN, 1x WAN|
TP-Link Archer AX3000: Reliable performance
The Archer AX3000 proved to be reliable in my testing. It passed my three-day stress test with no disconnection at all. It also has a good range, able to cover a house of some 1800 ft² (170 m²) good Wi-Fi signal throughout, when placed in the middle.
Wi-Fi coverage generally varies depending on the environment, but you can expect the router’s range to be slightly better than that of any Wi-Fi 5 one. I did have some mixed feelings about the router’s speeds, however.
Fluctuating Wi-Fi speeds
First of all, my Wi-Fi 6 clients had difficulty connecting to it at the top 2.4 Gbps. Most of the time, the negotiated rate was shown at 1.2 Gbps or lower, even when I made the router work in the 802.11ax mode, using the 160MHz channel bandwidth. As a result, the router’s performance was lower than that of other Wi-Fi 6 routers I’ve reviewed.
The router averaged just 730 Mbps at a close range, and when I increased the distance to 40 feet (12 m), it now registered 515 Mbps. Considering I couldn’t get the Wi-Fi 6 clients to connect at top speeds, high-end Wi-Fi 5 clients did better in the long-range test, by the way, with higher sustained rates, as you can see on the chart above.
On the 2.4GHz band, the router did about the same as most routers. There’s nothing to brag about, but it was fast enough to deliver a moderate broadband connection in full.
Slow NAS performance
Considering the Archer AX3000 features a USB 2.0 (and not 3.0) port, I didn’t expect much from its network-attached storage performance. I tested it with a SanDisk Extreme Portable SSD and, via a Gigabit connection, got the average speeds lower than a typical USB 2.0 connection.
With the write speed of just 18 MB/s and the read speed of 34 MB/s, the TP-Link Archer AX3000 is just too slow to work as a NAS server on its own — get a dedicated server instead.
By the way, in case you’re wondering, the router does support Time Machine backup when hosting an external drive. It even allows for limiting the backup size, so you won’t need to do that separately.
TP-Link Archer AX3000's Rating
Reliable Wi-Fi, good coverage
Tons of network settings and customization
Responsive web user interface, useful mobile app
Middling Wi-Fi specs
Fluctuating Wi-Fi connection speeds
No multi-gig port, USB 2.0
With modest specs, the TP-Link Archer AX3000 doesn’t aim to break any records. Instead, it means to make Wi-Fi 6 no longer cost-prohibitive, and for that, it’s a smashing success.
You won’t get to brag, but for now, this router will give some benefits as those that cost many times more.
So, if you’re looking to replace that aging low-end Wi-Fi 5 router, keep the Archer AX3000 in mind. Chances are you won’t go wrong with it. Or you can pay a little more and get the Archer AX50 which has even better performance and more features.
Comments are subject to approval, redaction, or removal.
It's generally faster to get answers via site/page search. Your question/comment is one of many Dong Knows Tech receives daily.
(•) If you represent a company/product mentioned here, please use the contact page or a PR channel.
50 thoughts on “TP-Link Archer AX3000 Review: An Affordable Wi-Fi 6 Router”
I see the ax3000 has an Intel Home Wi-Fi chipset. Do any wifi 6e routers use this chipset?
Also do you have any security concerns with TP-Link routers?
I already answered this question in this post.
Thanks for the very insightful reviews and all the data you provide. It’s very helpful.
I thought I’d mention that I found a bug in the TP-Link AX3000 software. It seems that when users engage QoS in the router management software, it can actually degrade throughput. My Ethernet connected desktop dropped throughput by approximately 50%. And the full throughput will not be achieved again until after completing a factory reset of the router. I also have similar results for cell phones wirelessly connected to the router. TP-Link Tech Support has acknowledged the bug, but not yet advised when a software update will be issued.
I do not know if this bug affects the AX50.
That’s how QoS is supposed to do, Brian.
I’m currently using a TP-Link AX3000. Aside from not having WPA3 and Third-party Firmware capabilities, it is a OK Budget Wifi-6 router. I just hope the TP-Link keeps the Updates coming for a long time 🙏.
Hi thank you so much for your promt reply. Sadly i the price i quoted for asus ax3000 was wrong, it’s actualy 60-70% more than the price of tp link ax50, making the asus asus almost equal to tp link c4000. I just read one of you article which says a higher end ac router is still better than mid range ax routers. So which one is the best deal out of these three? Im looking at 5 years of usage at least. Thank you.
I don’t live in India, Soumyajit, so I have no idea. But here’s the list of best Wi-Fi 5 routers.
Hi, what would you suggest i should get? Archer ax3000 or asus ax58/ax3000 ? Asus is roughly 30% more expensive in my country. so is it worth the extra money?
Get the Asus, Soumyajit.
Hi Dong, thanks for your reply. Can you explain to my why I shouldn’t use apple devices, and why I shouldn’t test to WLAN directly? The comparison is between a wired connection directly to the router and a wireless one, so if WLAN was the bottleneck, it would affect both. Also why are apple devices a bad choice?
I would think that this is the closest test to real life, rather than testing it in an artificial environment. I have a 1gb connection, that is confirmed through a wired connection directly to a router. I also thought it may be my network card on the brand new mac book pro, so I purchased a D-Link DIR-882 IEEE 802.11ac, and found it to have 350mbps. (more than 3 times faster than AX-3000).
In my opinion, Apple products are the worst (yes I understand how popular they are, etc. and I do have a lot of them.) The company also uses a lot of restrictions and proprietary technologies that their products are not a good representation of anything other than Apple itself. It’s like a cult. You can try your tests with a Windows or Chrome computer, you’ll see the difference.
By the way, the RT-AX3000 is a 2×2 router! So, of course, it’s slower than the D-Link, which is a top-tier Wi-Fi 5 router. It’s only faster if you use a Wi-Fi 6 client with it.
As for why you shouldn’t use Internet to test Wi-Fi (and probably vice versa), you can read more in this piece (and related ones.)
Hi Dong, thanks for the review,
I have had the TP-Link AX3000 for 6 months, and my speeds are 118 mbps down and 50mbps up. When I wire-connect, I get 700bps down and 50mbps up. I have 15 other wifi signals in my area, and the test was done a few feet away from the router. On my initial tests I had 250mbps down and 50mbps up. All tests done with mac book pro 2019. It seems it got worse with time?
What hardware and testing setup do you use? I wonder where the bottleneck is. i believe my mac book pro wifi is wifi5 2×2.
Generally, it’s not a good idea to use Intenet to test our Wi-Fi, Pavel. Also, try using non-Apple devices for the tests.
use iPerf to check your connection speed, one device as server connected by wire to the router then another wifi as client
It would be really awesome if you could add latency to your tests. Because that can vary quite a bit too and is obviously important for some situations.
Thanks for the suggestion, David. But latency is mostly the issue of the Internet connection. So, if I test it on a router, that only applies to my Internet at the time of testing. I think it’s only meaningful if I do that on a mesh system to see how that changes on the satellite unit.
The “homecare” feature is a subscription that must be maintained on a monthly basis. I find this information is hard to discover until you’ve already purchased it.
That only applies to TP-Link routers that have the Antivirus feature, Marvin, like the Deco X60, or the Archer C5400X.
Hi Dong, couple of typos:
1) “On the inside, the Archer AX3000 sports an Intel Home Wi-Fi WAV654 chipset that’s cable of delivering… up to 574 Mbps on the 2.4Ghz band”. It think it should be “capable of delivering” and “2.4Ghz” should be “2.4GHz”.
2) “Some 1800 f² should be (ft²).
Sorry, for being picky… but you did ask your readers to help spot typos 🙂
Typos fixed. Thanks, Jonathan. Keep them coming. 🙂
I wonder how this compares to a Tenda AC18 (AC1900 class Broadcom based). So essentially an Asus RT-68U?
It’s better if you have Wi-Fi 6 clients. Otherwise it’s not.
That is mesh right? Do you have any suggestions for a single router? The Archer C7 ALMOST covers everything I need, but ideally I could get about 10 additional feet of strong coverage, and the ability to handle more devices. We play some online games, so I’d be concerned with latency on mesh.
The Alien can work as a single router, Michael.
What is the range like on this thing? I have an old Archer C7 V2 that I would like to upgrade. The main thing I’m hoping for would better 5 GHZ range. Secondly would be the ability to handle more devices.
Its range is not much better, if at all, than the C7, Mike. You might want to consider the Ubiquiti Alien, instead.
I’m having trouble choosing between this TP-Link AX3000 or Netgear AX40. Which one do you think is better regardless of the price?
I haven’t tested the AX40, James, but it should be similar to the RAX120. That said, I’d recommend it over the TP-Link. But the difference between the two will be minimal.
I purchased the AX3000 Archer AX50 which is a completely different model from the unit you reviewed. If you go to TP-Link’s website the have 2 options listed for purchase of these models, one is priced at $129 (AX3OOO USB 2.0) version and the AX50-AX3000 model with USB 3.0 version priced at $159 with improved Firmware and slightly better internals available through Amazon.
Thanks for the input, Vinson. At the time of the review, the version you have wasn’t available in the U.S. and TP-Link provided me with the review unit as well as the info. I’ll look into this.
I found on Tp-link website two versions of that router. They have almost the same hardware and design but first one is model AX3000 with USB 2.0 and other is AX50 with USB 3.0. Could you make another review on AX50? AX50 have new firmware witch Improved the performance and stability.
I don’t think the AX50 is available in the US, Nick. I have no access to one.
As an FYI, I have the AX1500 model of this and the ‘smart connect’ feature doesn’t work well. Most of my devices connect at 2.4GHz regardless of range. I tried with the smart connect (both radios presumably with the same ssid and password and hopefully switching to the 5 if its available) and while my roku ultra 8′ from the router will connect at 5, my essential phone and lenovo laptop will only connect at 2.4 regardless of range. I had to use two SSID’s and passwords to get 5. Lame. This should be basic functionality that works in v1 on day 1.
Thanks for the input, Tom. I think in that case, separating the two bands is the right way to go.
Hey I just got the ax1500 version of this for $69, replacing an old tp-link ac1900 unit. So far so good. I have a large multifloor house and its easily giving me better signal.
One thing I was wondering and would like advice on is security. Is this router secure “enough”, or would I benefit from a firewall type box, presumably between the cable modem and the router? What would improve the security (and maybe filter out ads or bad sites?) without breaking the bank or requiring an expensive subscription? My virus/malware protection inside the house is good, but was pondering a whole home protection box.
Yes, the router is secure “enough”, Tom. Generally, you (the user) are the last defense. Just don’t do silly things and always be on the alert when being online. 🙂
Hello Dong. I saw that Walmart will have the Netgear Nighthawk AX4 for $100 on Black Friday, but I would have to order online and hope it’s in stock. Do you thinkI should try for the Netgear or consider this?
Get the AX4, Dylan. That’s a great deal!
Dong, thanks for the review. TP-LInk AX3000 ads mention USB port is 3.0 but your review said only 2.0. Which one is correct?
Take a guess, Bud. 🙂 I’ll add a text to mention that discrepancy. It’s USB 2.0.
Hi Dong, Thanks for the review.
Would you recommend this router, or another in particular in my situation? To cover my 3400 sq. ft house I am planning to move my current/older Tp-link archer C7 to a second location and get a new router for next to the modem. The plan is to use the C7 as an access point only connected to the new router via MOCA adapters to create a wired back haul.
Would you suggest a Wi-fi 6 router such as the one under review? An updated Wi-fi 5 Tp-link Archer A7? Stick with tp-link or start moving to ASUS? Any specific suggested would be appreciated.
You’re welcome, Robert. This router will work for your needs and the C7 can work in the AP mode, just make sure you set both to have the same Wi-Fi network. They will not create a mesh, however, meaning devices won’t automatically move from one to another as you walk around the house. Just keep that in mind. If you’re intending to do a mesh, I’d recommend getting Asus or Synology routers, instead (like two Blue Cave units), or two Synology MR2200ac units. But that means you’ll have to invest in new routers entirely. Considering you’re using MOCA as backhaul, there’s no need to invest in Wi-Fi 6.
Thanks for the great review. I purchased one of these at Walmart for $129 to give it a try. I’ve got to say it’s quite fast, covers 2000 sq. ft. easily and for the price it’s a terrific bargain. It’s no a Netgear Nighthawk AX or Asus AX but it does the job reliably at
1/3 the cost.
You’re welcome, Paul. And thanks for sharing the experience. 🙂
This same router is 129.99 at Walmart (it was originally supposed to be a Walmart exclusive I think? Walmart is listed as the only seller on TP-Link’s website.)
Also I like the non-removable antennas to some degree, on my Archer AC1900 the antennas would somehow work their way loose at certain angles and I would have to re tighten them.
Also I like how it’s long range 2.4ghz performance doesn’t really fall off. At close range I use 5GHz anyhow.
Yes, Kenneth, it was initially Walmart exclusive. And yeah, this is quite a great router, especially for the Walmart pricing.
Be advised that the antennas DO come off if you aren’t careful. I was peeling the plastic off of them when I was unboxing and one came off in my hand with a gray wire connecting it. I was able to carefully reorient it and slide it back on. Looks like some tongue and groove plastic.
Dong – Thanks for the great reviews, they’re much appreciated!
Quick question: Should I get this or the ASUS AC86U? You had a great review for the 86U, but I’m finding mixed reviews online. $150 is really the top end of what I want to spend at this point…currently running an old ASUS RT66U with a Netgear CM600. I’d love to simply get close to the 275Mbps I pay for and have a router that can handle future service upgrades. Thanks in advance!
You’re welcome, Stephen. Get the RT-AC86u or the Blue Cave. Coming from the RT-AC66U, you’ll feel a lot more at home with those two, considering the budget. It’s OK to wait a couple of years before upgrading to Wi-Fi 6 anyway.
I just picked one of these up and have to agree, for home use and the price it’s really nice. I was looking for wifi 6 as my wife and I’s phones support it. This is basically half the price of the next closest router at the moment. My old router was an Asus(wireless N and was showing its age), and it was great, but $250 for their cheaper ax router is steep when you only need to cover about 1600sqft. I feel this one will serve me well for quite a while.