Friday, September 30, 2022 β€’ Welcome to the πŸ’― No-Nonsense Zone❗
πŸ›οΈ Check out Today’s πŸ”₯Amazon logoDeals! πŸ›’

Archer AX3200 vs. Archer AX50: TP-Link’s Budget Tri-band vs. Dual-band

Share what you're reading!
TP Link AX3200 vs AX50
The Tri-band Archer AX3200 is much larger than the dual-band Archer AX50.

On the face of it, the Archer AX3200 vs. Archer AX50 matchup doesn’t make sense. These two TP-Link Wi-Fi 6 routers are different. But folks have asked for this comparison, so there must be a reason behind it. And the whole thing turned out to be quite interesting.

There are very few things in common between these two. First, both are relatively budget-minded. The AX3200 costs around $180, while the AX50 goes for some $30 less. So they are routers for the budget-minded.

Both are from TP-Link and, for the most part, share the same set of settings and features via the standard robust web user interface. You can also use both with TP-Link’s Tether mobile app if you’re willing to link your router with a TP-Link ID account.

Archer AX3200 vs. Archer AX50: Hardware specifications

Full NameTP-Link Archer AX3200
 Wi-Fi 6 Tri-Band Router
TP-Link Archer AX3000 
Dual-Band Wi-Fi 6 Router
ModelArcher AX3200Archer AX50
Dimensions10.91 x 7.32 x 1.26 in 
(277.11.2 x 185.92 x 32 mm)
10.2 Γ— 5.3 Γ— 1.5 in 
(260.2 x 135.0 x 38.6 mm)
Weight1.9 lbs (.86 kg)1.24 lbs (.56 kg)
Processor1.5GHz Quad CoreDual-Core CPU
Wi-Fi TechnologyTri-band Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) AX3200Dual-band Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) AX3000
5GHz-1 Wi-Fi Specs2×2 AX:  Up to 1201Mbps
Channel Width: 20/40/80MHz
2×2 AX: Up to 2.4Gbps
Channel Width: 20/40/80/160MHz
5GHz-2 Wi-Fi Specs2×2 AX: Up 1440Mbps
Channel Width: 20/40/80MHz
None
2.4GHz Wi-Fi Specs2×2 AX: Up to 574Mbps
Channel Width: 20/40MHz 
2×2 AX: Up to 574Mbps
Channel Width: 20/40MHz 
Backward Compatibility802.11a/b/g/n/ac802.11a/b/g/n/ac
Wireless SecurityWPA/WPA2, 
WPA-PSK/WPA2-PSK, 
WPA2/WPA3
64/128-bit WEP, 
WPA/WPA2, 
WPA-PSK/WPA2-PSK
Mobile AppTP-Link TetherTP-Link Tether
Web User InterfaceYesYes
Bridge ModeNoNo
AP ModeYesYes
Mesh-ReadyYes (OneMesh)TBD
USB Port1x USB 3.0, 1x USB 2.01x USB 3.0
Gigabit Port3x LAN, 1x WAN/LAN4x LAN, 1x WAN
Multi-Gig Port1x 2.5Gbps WAN/LANNone
Link AggregationNoneYes (LAN 2+ LAN 3)
Hardware specifications: Archer AX3200 vs Archer AX50

Archer AX3200 vs. Archer AX50: Differences

There are a lot of differences between these two. First off, the AX50 is a standard worldwide version — you can buy it anywhere. The AX3200 in the US is available only at Costco.

The AX3200 is a tri-band dual-stream (2×2) router with the total bandwidth (of all bands combined) capping at 3200Mbps. The AX50, on the other hand, is a dual-band 2×2 router limiting at 3000Mbps.

If you notice the slight difference between the numbers, that’s because the AX3200 doesn’t support the venerable 160MHz channel width, so each of its 5GHz band caps at 1200Mbps at most.

The AX50’s single 5GHz band, on the other hand, can handle up to 2400Mbps. In other words, thanks to the support for 160MHz channel width, the AX50 has the same 5GHz bandwidth as the AX3200 despite having one band fewer.

Both routers come with four network ports. However, while the AX50 is a pure Gigabit router (4 LANs + 1 WAN) with Link Aggregation, the AX3200 has one 2.5Gbps port that can work either as a WAN or a LAN port.

Both have a USB 3.0 port, but the AX3200 also has a second USB 2.0 port.

TP Link AX3200 vs AX50 Back
The two routers have the same number of network ports though they are not all the same.

While sharing the same web interface, the AX50 has a better feature set. For example, it comes with built-in Antivirus protection that helps keep the entire network safe. Not only the AX3200 don’t have that, its other features (QoS, Parental Control, etc.) are also the stripped-down versions of those in the AX50.

There’s one thing the AX3200 is better, though, it’s the first Wi-Fi 6 router that supports TP-Link’s OneMesh. As a result, you can add a select extender to it to form a mesh system. The AX50 is slated to get this feature, too, though that’s not a warranty.

Archer AX3200 vs. Archer AX50: Performance and ratings

I initially tested the two routers at different times but did some additional tests on both routers simultaneously for this matchup.

Specifically, in the additional tests, I used two 2×2 Wi-Fi 6 clients to determine their wireless-to-wireless performance. The tests aimed to show the difference in bandwidth between the two.

TP Link AX3200 vs AX50 Box
The two routers come in two packages of totally different sizes.

In the case of the AX3200, I connected each client to one of its 5GHz bands. For the AX50, both clients are connected to its only 5Ghz band. The test showed the tri-band router edged out the dual-band cousin by a small margin at a close range and by a larger one father out.

The AX3200 also did better with Wi-Fi 5 clients, but in the rest of the tests with Wi-Fi 6 clients, the AX50 was almost consistently faster. The two delivered about the same coverage in my testing. Either can probably handle a home of some 1800 ftΒ² (170 mΒ²) when placed in the middle.

While both routers can host a portable drive and work as a mini NAS server, even with Time Machine backup support, neither is available due to their modest performance, as shown here. Though faster in this test, I find the AX3200 more disappointing considering it has a multi-gig port.

TP-Link Archer AX3200's Rating

8 out of 10
TP Link Archers AX3200 Label
Performance
8 out of 10
Features
7 out of 10
Ease of Use
8.5 out of 10
Value
8.5 out of 10

Pros

Reliable Wi-Fi performance, with decent throughput speeds

Tri-band with 2.5Gbps network port

Affordable

Standard web interface

Cros

Modest hardware specs

No Antivirus

No 160MHz channel width

Slow NAS performance when hosting a portable drive

Simple QoS and Parental Control

Archer AX3200 vs Archer AX50 Performance Chart

TP-Link Archer AX50's Rating

8.4 out of 10
Archer AX50 Right Angle
Performance
8.5 out of 10
Features
8.5 out of 10
Ease of Use
8 out of 10
Value
8.5 out of 10

Pros

160 MHz channel support with fast and reliable performance for mid-tier router

Tons of helpful networking and Wi-Fi settings

Useful features, including free real-time online protection

Comparatively affordable

Compact design, wall-mountable

Cros

No multi-gig network port or Dual-WAN

HomeCare requires a mobile app and login account with TP-Link to work

Slow NAS performance when hosting a portable drive

Runs a bit warm

Despite being so different, these two are similar routers in terms of Wi-Fi experience. If you want a slightly higher Wi-Fi bandwidth i.e., the AX3200 is somewhat a better deal if you have many clients. If you have a Costco membership, that is.

On the other hand, you want something compact with no constraint in terms of features and settings. Go with the AX50. Save yourself a couple of bucks to buy your friend a coffee.

Looking to compare other Wi-Fi solutions? Check them all out here.

Share what you just read!

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 that Dong Knows Tech receives daily. Β 

  1. Strictly no bigotry, profanity, trolling, violence, or spamming -- including unsolicited bashing/praising/plugging a product/brand (β€’).
  2. You're presumed to have read this page in its entirety, including related linked posts and previous comments -- questions already addressed will likely be ignored.
  3. Be reasonable, attentive, and respectful! (No typo-laden or cryptic comment, please!)

(β€’) Per the πŸ’―no-nonsense policy, all comments with an external link are scrutinized, and most links are redacted. Do not leave a comment if you're, in any capacity, representing a company/product mentioned here! Instead, send Dong Knows Tech a private message or use a PR channel.

Thank you!

2 thoughts on “Archer AX3200 vs. Archer AX50: TP-Link’s Budget Tri-band vs. Dual-band”

    • I have no experience with the former — it’s not available where I am — but it seems to be a very week device. I’d go with the AX50, Vasil.

      Reply

Leave a Comment