Router aggregating at least 3 bands + QAM256+MIMO 4x4 / LTE/5G or CPE

Can you recommend a desktop router that aggregates at least 3 LTE bands (ideally 4) + QAM256 + MIMO4x4 or some LTE/5G - router or CPE with external antenna connectivity that can be found in one of the lists below:

- https://openwrt.org/toh/start?dataflt%5BBrand*%7E%5D=
- https://tomato.groov.pl/?page_id=69
- https://github.com/RMerl/asuswrt-merlin.ng/wiki/Supported-Devices
- https://en.techinfodepot.shoutwiki.com/wiki/List_of_Padavan_firmware_supported_devices
- https://wiki.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Supported_Devices

There are many threads on the forum about routers, band aggregation but mostly Huawei routers are pointed out (missing from the above lists) or no data on the number of aggregated bands, or no 4x4 MIMO, or no possibility to connect external antennas etc.

Huawei B818

Unfortunately, it does not meet the requirements I described. Missing from the lists under the links. No possibility of connecting external antennas.

jezykpl wrote:

Unfortunately, it does not meet the requirements I described. Missing from the lists under the links. No possibility of connecting external antennas.

RM502Q-AE and any routerboard. In my opinion, in the case of MT, you do not need to win alternative software.
Personally I use lm960 in the rb33g, but there in practice is not despite 4x4 unfortunately, although the outputs for antennas are 4. Simply on the Polish bands does not jump 4x4.

And in general I recommend checking the technical data of the modem, if the manufacturer publishes. Despite 4x4 is often unavailable on all bands, and only on selected ones. Or does not work in the case of aggregation, etc., etc.

Don't play around with crude routers and combinations with software, on some mostly expensive for their capabilities inventions. Buy the recommended B818. It has as much as possible external antenna connectors on TS9. You switch it to bridge mode and you are already doing advanced network functions on your any (Mikrotik, Cisco, Draytek, Ubiquiti or other) router.

IC_Current wrote:

Buy the recommended B818. It has as much as possible external antenna connectors on TS9. You switch it to bridge mode and already do yourself on your any (Mikrotik, Cisco, Draytek, Ubiquiti or other) router advanced networking functions.

That's right, except that on one condition that you buy it at a good price from an operator with an offer or from the secondary market (it's not worth more than 800PLN, for a new one offered in stores it's not worth overpaying, as 5G-ZTE modem-routers are already available at this price).

Ok. Thank you and could someone please tell me what is the superiority of Huawei B818 over ZTE MC801A-5G ?

From what I can see the prices are almost identical.
ZTE and B818 have external antennas, 4 aggregation of bands.
ZTE has an advantage because it supports 5G, has WIFI6.

jezykpl wrote:

and could someone tell me what superiority Huawei B818 has over ZTE MC801A-5G ?

From what I can see, price-wise they are almost identical.
ZTE and B818 have external antennas, 4 band aggregation.
ZTE has an advantage because it supports 5G, has WIFI6

All in all, here you have already answered yourself, in a way also to my suggestion about the comment on Huawei. B818-that's "old" hardware (from 2 years ago), less available yet performs well with 4G+ networks. He won't be more available because new/better units (including the aforementioned ZTE, of which there are more in distribution, therefore the price more affordable) will supplant him.

Comparing 5G router MC801a with B818 LTE 4 CC CA is inadequate, the basic question is whether you will use 5G and with which operator, the tests you did on NetWORKS operators were promising despite the lack of antenna working on 2600MHzi router 4CC CA QAM256.
In the case of the MC801A, there are still doubts whether the external antenna connectors work on 800-900/1800-2600MHz or only on C-BAND.
As for your question, colleague @m.jastrzębski proposed a non-standard solution, the rest of the available routers. For my part, for 5g/LTE I use MC7010 and as a router for LTE 4 CC CA QAM256 I use Netgear ORBI LBR20,based on QUECTEL EG18-EA.

matek451 wrote:

Comparing 5G router MC801a with B818 LTE 4 CC CA is inadequate, the basic question is whether you will use 5G and at which operator, the tests you did on NetWORKS operators were promising despite the lack of antenna working on 2600MHzi router 4CC CA QAM256.
In the case of the MC801A, there are still doubts whether the external antenna connectors work on 800-900/1800-2600MHz or only on C-BAND.
As for your question, colleague @m.jastrzębski proposed a non-standard solution, the rest of the available routers. For my part, for 5g/LTE I use MC7010 and as a router for LTE 4 CC CA QAM256 I use Netgear ORBI LBR20,based on QUECTEL EG18-EA.

I proposed a solution that realizes the requirements of MIMO 4x4 and external antennas. Somsiad just got himself an MC801 and there are only 2 antenna outputs, so either MIMO 2x2 or external antennas. In addition, in the proposed solution, there is no doubt what and how it works in what mode etc, because the technical document is about 250 pages

P.S. Welcome back.

m.jastrzebski wrote:

I proposed a solution that realizes the requirements of MIMO 4x4 and external antennas. Somsiad just got himself an MC801 and there are only 2 antenna outputs, so either MIMO 2x2 or external antennas.

The client device does not need 4 antennas to work in MIMO 4x4, an example is ZTE MF286D-which theoretically works with only one antenna on the L2600, yet it turns on MIMO 4x4 (checked on 2 Orange transmitters with L2600 https://www.speedtest.net/result/12290556103 ).

jarek7714 wrote:

The client device does not need 4 antennas to operate in 4x4 MIMO

You cannot do 4x4 MIMO on two antennas. This follows from the very definition of MIMO. You can do MIMO4x2 or if you display MIMO4x4 on two antennas then the built-in antennas are used simultaneously with the external antennas.

IC_Current wrote:

It is impossible to do 4x4 MIMO on two antennas. This follows from the very definition of MIMO. You can do MIMO4x2, or if you display MIMO4x4 on two antennas then the built-in antennas are used at the same time as the external antennas.

And yet it can be done, the modem-router is hidden in a cast alu-casing/specifically such https://www.cyberbajt.co.uk/product/2368/housing-external-rb600-rb800.html at the mast with a MIMO/Corab antenna, and only achieves such performance when the primary band is B7 (16h/day), the transmitter about 2km away/no visibility. When it switches to B1/B3 upload drops by about x3.

jarek7714 wrote:

And yet it can be done, the modem-router is hidden in a cast alu-casing/specifically such

Well, that's just not the case. In the MIMO AxB notation itself, the number of antennas is written. A-number of transmit antennas, B-number of receive antennas. MIMO 4x4 comparing to cars is like writing 4x4 drive, that is, there are four wheels and four wheels are driven. You will not make a four-wheel drive in a two-wheeled vehicle.
If you have information about MIMO4x4 on two antennas then the only possibilities are:
- the built-in antennas are working, even with minimal gain.
- the software only shows streams from the transmitting antennas (then there will indeed be a number of 4)
- there is an error in the indicators in the software.

Added after 7 [minutes]:

jarek7714 wrote:

When switching to B1/B3 upload drops by about x3.

Further comparing to cars: You have three roads, each road is driven by cars, two roads are jammed and cars drive at 30km/h. One road only for selected cars (proximity to the transmitter, small bandwidth, bandwidth) is uncongested and cars drive it at 90km/h. Does this mean that road three is driven only by super racing cars (MIMO4x4), or could they be the same cars as on the other roads?

IC_Current wrote:

Well, precisely not. In the MIMO AxB notation itself, the number of antennas is written. A-number of transmit antennas, B-number of receive antennas. MIMO 4x4 comparing to cars is like writing 4x4 drive, that is, there are four wheels and four wheels are driven. You won't make four-wheel drive in a two-wheeled vehicle.

If that were the case then the speed on upload would be under 30Mbps, I tested this router for over 1500h ( 4G+ connection session status) before I decided to connect in extreme conditions (ba in Lodz I have less than 500m to BTS with visibility, but due to interference/signal reflections etc. on sticks from B593 did not connect in MIMO, only when I connected to an external antenna MIMO MARS from 6dB gain my transfer jumped on download 2x, on upload x3 (upload only with B7 baseband set).

IC_Current wrote:

- built-in antennas work, even with minimal gain.

I tested this before, on another modem- after tightening the case the signal is so weak that the modem did not establish a connection.

@jarek7714 Mathematically, MIMO is described like this:
[y]=[H][x]+[n]
y, H, x, n are matrices. x and y are the input and output vectors, n is the noise vector and H is the channel's ORTHOGONAL matrix.
As you probably remember from math, multiplying the orthogonal matrix by a vector will result in a vector of the same length as the input vector. There is no other way to do it. If you don't have four receiving antennas (y vector) then you won't do H translation with the transmit vector x containing four antennas.

IC_Current wrote:

[y]=[H][x]+[n]
y, H, x, n are matrices. x and y are the input and output vectors, n is the noise vector and H is the channel's ORTHOGONAL matrix.
As you probably remember from math, multiplying the orthogonal matrix by a vector will result in a vector of the same length as the input vector. There is no other way to do it. If you don't have four receiving antennas (y vector) then you won't do H-translation with the transmit vector x containing four antennas.

This is where the math gets big with the ZTE MF286D-MIMO 4x4 only works in it in the B7 band and there is one antenna , because the second polarization works with the other bands.

jarek7714 wrote:

This is where the math goes wrong with the ZTE MF286D-MIMO 4x4 only works in it on the B7 band and there is one antenna , because the other polarization works with the other bands.

Well, yes this ZTE violates the laws of mathematics and physics, it is not described by a state vector, it does not work according to standards but nevertheless the results of calculations and achieved throughputs are in accordance with these mathematical assumptions, in general it bends space-time and is an invention of aliens and Bill Gates distributes 5G chpiy through it, but in fact they are Amazon chpiy, because this ZTE can change the structure of matter.
No rational arguments reach you.

And can you let us know what kind of external antenna connectors are in this zte 801a ?

unfortunately there is no such information in official sources.

Today I have an antenna cable prepared for the connector as shown in the picture.

Will I need any connector ?
.

jezykpl wrote:

And can you let us know what the external antenna connectors are on this zte 801a ?

TS-9

jarek7714 wrote:

The client device does not need 4 antennas to operate in MIMO 4x4,

I knew it! I friggin' knew it was a marketing scam. Those routers with a fartillion antennas what looks like a hedgehog. And here you only need 1 antenna and the router can work in MIMO 4x4, and in MIMO 8x8 probably too! Jarek is "switched on" the laws of physics do not apply!
P.S. You owe me a monitor cleaning (I spat).

Unfortunately, but still no verified information on whether the MC801A works with external antennas as I wrote, on 4https://4pda.to/forum/index.php?showtopic=1011903 which is a mine of knowledge on his and not only on the subject users write about the band 3.4-3.8GHz so the connectors would be useless for LTE and 5G bands used by Polish operators. You, as I see it, do not take into account what I wrote, currently I do not have access to this router so I can not verify it myself, maybe someone who has this router and an external antenna for it and will check it himself and share the results.
In the matter of MIMO4X4 on MF286D, for obvious reasons I will not comment, although I have this router and will check how it works with my antenna in Orange.

m.jastrzebski wrote:

jarek7714 wrote:

The client device does not need 4 antennas to operate in MIMO 4x4,

I knew it! I friggin' knew it was a marketing scam. Those routers with a fartillion antennas what looks like a hedgehog. And here you only need 1 antenna and the router can work in MIMO 4x4, and in MIMO 8x8 probably too! Jarek is "switched on" the laws of physics do not apply!
P.S. You owe me a monitor cleaning (I spit).

It just doesn't get to Jarek's colleague that his modem works in MIMO 2x2 upload (with two antennas simultaneously) in QAM64 modulation. With this combination, you can get 150.7Mbps of throughput in a 20Mhz channel width. 150Mbps is precisely the nominal maximum upload value of this router and Jarek's result of 70Mbps is within this range (even with the 15Mhz channel used by Orange and TM).
Unfortunately you have a colleague who is immune to arguments and creates a parallel reality.

IC_Current wrote:

It simply doesn't occur to colleague Jarek that his modem works in MIMO 2x2 upload (with two antennas simultaneously) in QAM64 modulation. With this combination, you can get 150.7Mbps of throughput in a 20Mhz channel width. 150Mbps is precisely the nominal maximum upload value of this router and Jarek's result of 70Mbps is within this range (even with the 15Mhz channel used by Orange and TM).
Unfortunately you have a colleague who is immune to arguments and creates a parallel reality.

. This is how you translate for yourself, you are trying to rationally prove that you are wrong. The modem maxes out at over 80Mbps- only when the primary band is B7, theoretically the antenna acts as a SISO for B7, in theory your translations would make sense if the BTS only worked for me, well even 5 years ago you might have wondered/ today customers also use upload and it's definitely greater progress has been made (in the age of ubiquitous HD quality monitoring and access applications). Even more so when I have a comparison with a Netgear LBR20(68N) and a cat.18 modem, which pulls half that speed-probably in MIMO, because in SISO on another modem in identical conditions it pulls below 30Mbps.

_cheetah_ wrote:

I will also point out that unlike MIMO, aggregation of bands can be realized from a single antenna, only then, of course, there is no MIMO, and the receiver works in SISO.

After all, on cat.6-19 modems there is no aggregation in upload.

jarek7714 wrote:

So translate for yourself, you are trying to rationally prove you wrong. The modem maxes out at over 80Mbps- only when the primary band is B7, theoretically the antenna works as a SISO for B7, in theory your translations would make sense if the BTS only worked for me,

Do you have any idea what you are writing about? In B7 you have QAM64 and MIMO2x2 you achieve up to 151Mbps upload on this band. In Bands B1 and B3 there is upload in QAM16 and MIMO2x2 and there you can achieve 61Mbps. Which probably explains your three times lower results in speedtests. In SISO you can get 75Mbps with QAM64 and 30.6Mbps with QAM16. These are all throughputs at the physical layer and at the IP layer you still have to subtract about 8% from that.

IC_Current wrote:

Do you have any idea what you are writing about?

Don't get me wrong, but why do you persist in trying to debate with a colleague who contradicts physics. Does it make sense? In the old days there was a saying on forums not to feed the troll.

m.jastrzebski wrote:

IC_Current wrote:

Do you have any idea what you are writing about?

Don't get me wrong, but why do you persist in trying to debate with a colleague who defies physics. Does it make sense? In the old days there was a saying on forums not to feed the troll.

You're right. I've gotten myself all worked up. Another moment and in trolling fellow Jarek will pull us down to his level and beat us with experience.

IC_Current wrote:

Do you have any idea what you are writing about? In B7 you have QAM64 and MIMO2x2 you achieve up to 151Mbps upload on this band.

No 151Mbps at 15MHz, i.e., contrary to 99% of posts here and on similar forums, the ZTE MF286D is running MIMO 2x2.

Starting from 7 cat LTE on UL there is aggregation of LTE bands, MF286D runs on X12 and on UL this modem has 13 cat LTE i.e. aggregates 2 LTE bands with 20MHz UL width up to 150Mb/s. QUECTEL EG18-EA which is in LBR20 also aggregates 2 LTE bands with UL up to 150Mbps. Orange on some stations has launched aggregation of 2 LTE bands https://gsm.biz.pl/2021/08/08/orange-internet-2xca-lte-uplink/
This is so much about MIMO4X4 in Lodz on Orange station. I have the two routers myself but so far on my Orange base station still CA on UL is not working.