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

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.

Archer AX3200 vs. Archer AX50: Similarities

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 Name	TP-Link Archer AX3200  Wi-Fi 6 Tri-Band Router	TP-Link Archer AX3000  Dual-Band Wi-Fi 6 Router
Model	Archer AX3200	Archer AX50
Dimensions	10.91 x 7.32 x 1.26 in  (277.11.2 x 185.92 x 32 mm)	10.2 × 5.3 × 1.5 in  (260.2 x 135.0 x 38.6 mm)
Weight	1.9 lbs (.86 kg)	1.24 lbs (.56 kg)
Processor	1.5GHz Quad Core	Dual-Core CPU
Wi-Fi Technology	Tri-band Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) AX3200	Dual-band Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) AX3000
5GHz-1 Wi-Fi Specs	2x2 AX:  Up to 1201Mbps Channel Width: 20/40/80MHz	2x2 AX: Up to 2.4Gbps Channel Width: 20/40/80/160MHz
5GHz-2 Wi-Fi Specs	2x2 AX: Up 1440Mbps Channel Width: 20/40/80MHz	None
2.4GHz Wi-Fi Specs	2x2 AX: Up to 574Mbps Channel Width: 20/40MHz	2x2 AX: Up to 574Mbps Channel Width: 20/40MHz
Backward Compatibility	802.11a/b/g/n/ac	802.11a/b/g/n/ac
Wireless Security	WPA/WPA2,  WPA-PSK/WPA2-PSK,  WPA2/WPA3	64/128-bit WEP,  WPA/WPA2,  WPA-PSK/WPA2-PSK
Mobile App	TP-Link Tether	TP-Link Tether
Web User Interface	Yes	Yes
Bridge Mode	No	No
AP Mode	Yes	Yes
Mesh-Ready	Yes (OneMesh)	TBD
USB Port	1x USB 3.0, 1x USB 2.0	1x USB 3.0
Gigabit Port	3x LAN, 1x WAN/LAN	4x LAN, 1x WAN
Multi-Gig Port	1x 2.5Gbps WAN/LAN	None
Link Aggregation	None	Yes (LAN 2+ LAN 3)

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 (2x2) router with the total bandwidth (of all bands combined) capping at 3200Mbps. The AX50, on the other hand, is a dual-band 2x2 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.

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 2x2 Wi-Fi 6 clients to determine their wireless-to-wireless performance. The tests aimed to show the difference in bandwidth between the two.

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 ft² (170 m²) 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.

Which is a better choice?

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.