GideonTech.com Forums

  • August 16, 2022, 10:56:50 PM
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Tomato vs DD-WRT  (Read 7413 times)

blafrisch

  • Elite Modder
  • ****
  • Karma: +21/-5
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,857
  • Blargg
    • Look at me
Tomato vs DD-WRT
« on: June 16, 2008, 07:55:50 AM »

I had been using the latest stable build of DD-WRT on my Buffalo WHR-G54S since the day I bought it.  My internet would slow to a crawl if anyone was using BitTorrent, most web pages wouldn't load and such.  Well I didn't have the QoS turned on, so that was the obvious thing to try.  Turned it on, set BitTorrent and various other bulk transfer protocols to the bulk setting, set DNS and VOIP to the highest, and set HTTP to medium.  Did it help?  Not really at all.  So if one of my housemates ever complained I'd log into my router, see which of us the hog was (sometimes me) and block their MAC address for a little while.  Solved the problem very temporarily and was a pain that shouldn't need to ever take place because QoS should have been doing that for me.

Well, I've known about Tomato for some time, but I've read in forums a few times before that DD-WRT was the better firmware.  Let me tell you that it couldn't be further from the truth.  After installing Tomato it was another interface to get used to but things that I was looking for weren't too hard to find, mostly port forwarding and QoS.  The interface was overall much quicker than DD-WRT's.  The adding of and editing of ports to forward was SO much more intuitive.  There were a couple of default things there already, but they seemed to just be examples since I didn't even have a 192.168.1.2 on my network so I deleted them.  Next was on to QoS, it was disabled by default.  I checked the checkbox to turn it on, saved, then went on to customize just like I had done in DD-WRT.  After saving I wanted to test it out, so it was time to hammer my network.  I started uTorrent on my laptop (wireless client) and uTorrent on my server (wired client), both downloading various Linux distros.  This would have stopped my HTTP access before, but upon firing up Firefox the page loaded like it was the only network activity.  I surfed for a while and never noticed a slowdown.  I am definitely sticking with Tomato and would recommend to others that use DD-WRT on their WRT enabled routers to switch.
Logged
You're just about as useless as JPEGs to Helen Keller.
~ Wierd Al

GideonX

  • Administrator
  • Elite Modder
  • *****
  • Karma: +93/-5
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9,465
    • GideonTech.com
Re: Tomato vs DD-WRT
« Reply #1 on: June 16, 2008, 08:26:10 AM »

My bro-in-law uses Tomato. Not too many problems with it thus far.
Logged

GTF Gallery
4 8 15 16 23 42

Hak Foo

  • Elite Modder
  • ****
  • Karma: +12/-5
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,779
  • Far too old for his interests
Re: Tomato vs DD-WRT
« Reply #2 on: June 16, 2008, 09:42:56 PM »

I suspect part of the appeal of DD-WRT is that it runs on a lot more things.

I was able to get it running on one of those $15 Airlink101 jobs, although apparently there are a wide array of glitches and things that must be turned off to make it run, and I therefore can't be bothered to actually replace my stock-firmware WRT54G v2.

OTOH, for Tomato, I'd have to install it on the '54G and I'm not about to risk my *good* router :)
Logged

merlinicorpus

  • Global Moderator
  • Elite Modder
  • *****
  • Karma: +1341/-1341
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,657
  • One with the corn.
    • merliniworks
Re: Tomato vs DD-WRT
« Reply #3 on: June 17, 2008, 01:20:21 PM »

I'm using Tomato on my WRT54GS 1.0.  I like it because of the simplicity.  Does everything I need it to do and nothing I don't.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2008, 01:23:55 PM by merlinicorpus »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.229 seconds with 33 queries.