Performance Testing

This section will continue to evolve and change depending on how the category is received, and depending on whether we manage to get our hands on some useful tools that will help better measure the performance of routers and other Wi-Fi systems in general. As it stands today, a combination of the excellent, freely available iPerf3 on my Win 10 desktop PC, my laptop, and even an iPerf3 Android app helped measure throughput for the Gryphon Tower router as-is and as part of the 2-pack mesh WiFi system, with a ruler/tape measuring the distance from it and a Wi-Fi analyzer using my phone Wi-Fi antenna and connection to measure signal attenuation as I moved from right on top of the base router to further and further away inside my residence. Please note that signal attenuation depends heavily on a number of factors apart from just distance, including any barriers between and other devices operating in the bands (2.4 GHz, 5 GHz, etc.). With a common test location, the variable being tested is the router/Wi-Fi system itself, and it would as such be valid to compare results to others products tested thus.


The chart above shows how the antennas in the Gryphon Tower router, first by itself and then as part of a 2-pack mesh, cope with connected clients at various distances from it, and how the supporting mesh repeater adds positively to it depending on where it is placed. The client was positioned at varying points away in a 3D space with the shortest distance measurement taken between the two. Given the nature of the bands supported, this test was conducted for Wireless N at 2.4 GHz and Wireless AC at 5 GHz to best replicate end-user applications, as in my own case, and we can see that the signal loss is heavier for the 5 GHz network relative to the 2.4 GHz network, which is as expected. In both cases, there is a minor decrease in signal strength as you move even only slightly away from the router, which then drops more drastically before you move into range of the repeater unit in the second graph above for signal strength. Note that I never got very close to the satellite unit, having positioned it such that it merely helped overall vs. providing a concentrated field of strong signal strength, and I added in a data point with a drywall (typical in most US residences today) in between as well. If your residence has walls out of brick or wood, for example, the signal loss will likely be higher, so you may want to position the satellite unit where you have another hub of activity—a home office or living room, for instance.


Here is a visual look at how various points in my apartment fared with just a single router and then both connected in the mesh. As you would expect, things are a lot better with the entire Wi-Fi system hooked up, and I do encourage taking the time to position the repeater(s) as per your needs. As it is, I have no problems with a strong, stable wireless AC signal at 5 GHz wherever I need it now.


By removing the actual Internet speed connection out of the equation, a TCP throughput test done at these same spots away from the router paints a more useful story, while also helping with a comparison of those numbers across test residences by having the X-axis as the signal's attenuation instead of distance away from the router. The Gryphon Tower is a tri-band Wi-Fi system rated for a maximum of 1300/866 Mbps on Wireless AC and 400 Mbps on Wireless N, but those are ideal numbers that are unlikely to be seen in practice. Indeed, the two 5 GHz bands here do not add up cumulatively no matter how the AC3000 numbers come up, which, rather, just means that a larger number of wireless AC clients can be supported without having to prioritize one over another. The slowest of the server (the router in this case) and client will dictate the overall speed of traffic as well, and here, the maximum throughput (downlink) was 275 and 866 Mbps respectively for wireless N at 2.4 GHz and wireless AC at 5 GHz. They remained close to the maximum, especially on the 2.4 GHz wireless N network, following which a large drop down to, respectively, 82/186 Mbps started. Here too is where the presence of the repeater unit helped a lot, but we covered that above, so just be aware of how these numbers are only accurate for this specific test scenario. Uplink speeds are merely offset by 5–8 dB more attenuation, so they are not reported separately.


As of when this product was tested, I had tested four other routers for comparison. In order to best compare them across the possible variables, the decision was made to chart throughput at a set distance, 5 meters in this case. We can see clearly how the two mesh WiFi systems in the form of the Gryphon Tower (2-pack) and the NETGEAR Orbi RBK50 easily outperform the other three standalone routers to where a single node would have done better in some cases. This is perhaps not a fair comparison given the AmpliFi router can pair up with access points for a mesh network of its own, but I can only test what I have here. Also, interestingly enough, despite the Gryphon Tower very likely having hardware similar to the Orbi RBK50 inside if their specifications are anything to go by, we see the NETGEAR system performing slightly better consistently. This is perhaps due to the larger resources of the bigger company coming into play, with experience and firmware updates no doubt helping draw performance out more.


The power-draw comparison chart helps identify whether specific routers are vastly different from others, which ends up being the case here. A Brand Electronics 4-1850 power meter was used between the power adapter for the router unit and the satellite unit and wall socket. Simple Kill-A-Watt units are good for basic checks, but not reliable enough for tests in my opinion. Each router was set up for a minimum of 24 hours of use across multiple days, and power consumption was averaged across a period of idle (inactivity at night) and normal operation during the day. Note also that night mode in the AmpliFi HD mesh router turns off the screen and lighting, which will help its case, and there is a similar feature on the Gryphon Tower to turn off the LED at night. Regardless, while all five systems fare similarly at idle, it is during normal operation when the two WiFi systems take up significantly more power combined. This is one of the drawbacks of such Wi-Fi systems involving multiple products, but you do get higher performance here because of all the built-in antennas and the processor.

Not quantifiable and yet arguably one of the more important features here is Gryphon's network security that goes beyond the norm. Since every customer gets a year of premium protection and a 3-month trial of Gryphon Homebound, I did try these out for over a month each. Homebound especially was tested while I was at CES, with all the various hotel visits meaning hotspots and/or cellular data were being consumed with a wanton approach. I do wish Gryphon would offer more clarity on where the malware protection and ad-blocking blacklists are taken from, and being able to whitelist/blacklist URLs on a per-item basis would be nice. But it does do the job, especially with the ad-blocker for devices that do not support a browser plugin.