Page 1 of 1

Best firmware for TP-WR740N

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2018 7:44 am
by kajiya
Hey guys!

I've been using Gargoyle (1.8.1) for about a year or so, I started with OpenWrt 12.09, but soon realized that Gargoyle was better suited for my needs. After some months of reading and searchings, I've found that routers with 4MB flash and low CPU speeds are very limited, so newer firmware versions may not work properly.

With that in mind, should I use an older version of firmware (the 1.6.1 is based on Attitude Adjustment), in hope that it is better suited to a low-end router like mine, or should I go for the latest one (1.10.0, Barrier Breaker based), as there are reports of people using it with no issues on WR740N (same HW version)?

As far as I know, I never noticed performance issues with 1.8.1. But I've noticed that sometimes QoS won't work propely, but I've always blamed my ISP or poor configurations of QoS parameters. Maybe those are performance issues?

Thanks in advance!

Re: Best firmware for TP-WR740N

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:19 pm
by ispyisail
Try them all and give us a review.

Re: Best firmware for TP-WR740N

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 4:29 pm
by d3fz
kajiya wrote:With that in mind, should I use an older version of firmware (the 1.6.1 is based on Attitude Adjustment), in hope that it is better suited to a low-end router like mine, or should I go for the latest one (1.10.0, Barrier Breaker based), as there are reports of people using it with no issues on WR740N (same HW version)?
Gargoyle 1.10 is actually based on Chaos Calmer 15.05.1. Soon to be based on LEDE/OpenWRT.

As ispyisail mentioned above, the best/fastest way to find out is to try it by yourself and see it works/suits your needs. Keep in mind that flashing latest build on 4MB routers won't allow you to install any additional plugins, and may behave in unexpected ways.
As far as I know, I never noticed performance issues with 1.8.1. But I've noticed that sometimes QoS won't work propely, but I've always blamed my ISP or poor configurations of QoS parameters. Maybe those are performance issues?
Could be. QoS needs a good CPU to work properly.