TP-LinkDeco Mesh WiFi System(Deco M5) –Up to 5,500 sq. ft. Whole Home Coverage and 100+ Devices,WiFi Router/Extender Replacement, Anitivirus, 3-pack

I bought this for my parents house that had a basic 100 Mbps connection just installed. It was easy to set up (minus a couple snags. Remember to plug them in and sync them to the one by one. Then update the firmware. THEN move them to their final locations/daisy chain them/plug in switches/whatever) and visually looks attractive and unobtrusive enough to not at all be an eyesore; to the point my mother was impressed with how small and pretty they look.My initial impression is that this is a very worthwhile purchase.-----For more particulars about our situation: The house is an old house, with a long rectangular L-shape structure. They recently built an addition and the materials they used, somehow effectively turned the room in to a wifi Faraday cage. Even with their old router directly on the other side of the wall, next to no signal would pass through. And on the opposite side of the house, every time anyone would use the microwave (located in the center of the house) it would completely kill the WiFi for those rooms. It was time for an update.After a bit of research, without having to blow $300+ it was between this (Deco M5), the Google WiFi, and the Orbi RBK23.The Google WiFi had double Nat issues when daisy chaining them that I didn't want to have to worry about in case they were using a combo modem/router from the cable company, which ruled that out (I ended up just buying them a pure modem myself, so moot point).The Orbi Rbk23 has a nice tri-band technology that apparently helps a lot with wireless speeds (because the 3rd band is dedicated to back haul) but the more expensive Orbi RBK50 reportedly connectivity issues that I was worried the RBK23 might inherit.At the end of the day, I was planing to physically connect them by running Ethernet cables through the attic so I didn't really need the RBK23's fancy triband back haul technology for a $70 premium ($180 vs $250 at time of purchase)After everything setup, so far everything functions ALMOST perfectly. The only minor gripes I have are that:1.) This thing is almost *TOO* minimalist and pretty. There are no screw holes, you need to buy a separate mount if you want to stick it on a wall. It is also so lightweight that even weight of slightly dangling, connected Ethernet cables can actually put it off balance and make it tilt.2.) This thing gets fairly warm. Warm enough that my mother commented on it. Warm enough that I reconsidered sticking them to the wall with double sided tape like I was initially planing. They're definitely light enough, but Heat + adhesives doesn't usually workout well.3.) Older devices may have compatibility issues/authentication error issues with the mesh. So far both the HP inkjet printer and my Samsung Galaxy S6 consistently have similar issues where they initially connect, but after some period of time, they would drop signal and run in to an authentication error.This seems to be a firmware issue with the Galaxy S6 and 2.5ghz+5ghz mesh networks in general (regardless of brand as far as I can tell), supposedly there's a workaround that involves shutting off one of the bands (2.5g or 5g) on the router. Since this is also happening to the printer, I assume it's an older tech problem.4.) The App interface is very simplistic, which may feel like a significant step down if you're used to more feature rich routers.5.) The Monthly Report, is creepy. Disable it ASAP.6.) If you use Ethernet backhaul, you cannot use the second Ethernet port on the satellite/secondary routersI.E. You CAN connect the main router to the modem, then connect the router to a switchboard (and even another switch to that switch as I'm doing), then plug the secondary routers (and whatever else) to the switch.You CANNOT try to connect the modem to the router, then the router to a switch, then the switch to the satellite/second routers, and then try to connect anything else to the secondary routers. Trying to do so will automatically change the routers to wireless back haul mode.Some stats for the tech nerds:Speed test results with my laptop:WIRELESS MODE (No Ethernet Backhaul) with no internet usage.Main router (directly connected): 112 Mbps Up. 12 Mbps Down.Main router, 5ghz @ 5ft :110 Mbps down. 12 Mbps upMain router, 5ghz @ 25 ft : 110 Mbps down. 12 Mbps upSecondary Router (60 feet away through 4 plaster walls) directly connected: ~70 to 110 Mbps* 12 mbps upSecondary Router 5ghz @ 5ft: ~70 to 110 Mbps down* 12 mbps upSecondary Router 5ghz @15 ft through 1 wall: ~60 to 110 Mbps down* 12 mbps upWIRELESS MODE (No Ethernet Backhaul) with two 1080p60 video streams going in same roomSecondary Router (60 feet away through 4 plaster walls) directly connected: 70 to 110 Mbps*Secondary Router 5ghz @ 0 ft: 70 Mbps down* 11 mbps upSecondary Router 5ghz @ 5ft: 65 Mbps down* 10 mbps upSecondary Router 5ghz @15 ft through 1 wall: 50 Mbps down* 9 mbps up*Depending on conditions. Signal strength was erratic. At times it would preform at the maximum Mbps possible, but signal strength would randomly drop down to weak, causing the speeds to plummet to less than 1/2 to 1/4 normal speeds.Wired Mode*** (Ethernet backhaul-- Daisy chained: 1 Router connected to 2 switches connected to one another, then connected to the second router. one switch was 10/100/1000, one was 10/100. Will update when replaced.)*** with no internet usage:Main router Direct/5gz @5ft & @25ft: 110 Mbps 12 mbps upSecondary Router 5ghz &@0ft & @5ft & @15ft through wall: 85 Mbps 12 mbps upWired Mode*** (Ethernet backhaul-- 10/100 switchboard in chain. Will update when replaced) with 2 1080p60 streams going in same room***Secondary router 5ghz @ 0 ft 85 mbps 12 mbps upSecondary router 5ghz @ 5 ft 75 mbps 12 mbps upSecondary router 5ghz @ 15 ft through wall 70 mbps 11 mbps up** Also of note: With Ethernet Backhaul, all speeds are significantly more consistent (I.E. My microwave and other miscellaneous interference problem is completely gone)*** I'm FAIRLY certain that the 10/100 Ethernet switch I have daisy chained and connected to the second router is bottle necking the speeds. The third router (My configuration currently looks like |Modem| --> |Main router| --> | Switch One 10/100/100 | --> |TV| + |PS3| + |VR| + |third router| + |Switch Two 10/100| --> |Secondary router|) seems to have speeds of about 110 Mbps, just like the main router.UPDATED: Got a 10/100/100 switch replacement:Main router reports: 115 MbpsSecondary router 5ghz @15 ft through wall, no internet usage: 115 MbpsSecondary Router 5ghz @15ft with two 1080p60 live streams going: 107 Mbps

Works great!! I had a schlage lock that would not stay connected to the internet. Seems like the issue was my old erro. I decided to try this one and it works great! The lock stays connected to the internet and my signal is excellent in a two story condo.

My family bought this product to replace our rental router and extended pod. It's a great product and easy to set-up with the help of Mandy, who's the customer care specialist. This product Deco M5 (3 units) extended our WIFI extremely well .Thank you, TP-Link, for their products and services.

This was written the day after installing a trio of Deco m5 in "AP" (not "router") mode.My original wireless network consisted of my AT&T/U-Verse BGW210-700 gateway/AP/router downstairs, augmented by a DLink DIR-868L upstairs. The BGW210-700 was rock-solid downstairs and in the area immediately adjacent to the stairs and upstairs hallway, but just couldn't quite cut through the walls, doors, and RF noise from neighbors inside the upstairs bedrooms. I now have a m5 in the front and rear bedrooms, and the "master" m5 in the living room downstairs (forming a reasonably-equidistant triangle.At the time I bought the m5 trio, my alternative was a trio of EAP245v3 or EAP610 APs, paired with TP-Link's Omada software or OC200 controller to enable 802.11r/k/v. Since NONE of TP-Link's current Omada-compatible APs can use 6GHz channels, I knew that pretty much ANYTHING I bought now would be a 1-3 year stopgap purchase. For me, 802.11r/k/v was absolutely a non-negotiable requirement... and AFAIK, TP-Link is the only company that HAS real 802.11r/k/v gear that isn't "enterprise-priced".So... what did I end up having to sacrifice by going with the m5 instead of the EAP+Omada gear?1. M5 doesn't allow you to choose its channel. Period, end of story. It picks the channel, and hopefully you're satisfied with its decision.2. M5 can only use channels 36, 40, 44, and 48. To be fair, AFAIK the EAP2xx gear can't use DFS channels, either. I think SOME of the EAP6xx series can use DFS, but I'm not sure whether ALL of them can.2a. As far as I can tell, M5 never uses channel 165, which has historically been my favorite 802.11ac channel. I'm surrounded by adjacent neighbors using 40Mhz (if not 80MHz) and "wifi for everything", and channel 165 is the awesome wide-open 20Mhz refuge where the unwashed masses never go.3. M5 doesn't allow you to set the max power used by each AP... or set it at all. It has a function to "optimize", but you have absolutely zero control over the decisions it makes.4. There's no setting for 20MHz vs 40MHz. I'm actually not sure whether this is because it ONLY uses 20Mhz channels (which is what I actually prefer), or simply because it doesn't give you a choice.4. If M5 is capable of using different channels for the 3 APs, I haven't seen it do so. I'm pretty sure it is, in fact, limited to using the same channel for all 3. The thing is, I live in a dense neighborhood, and different parts of the house have RADICALLY different interference. If I were configuring the network myself, based on the site survey I did, I'd use channel 36 in one bedroom (where 40 and 44 have neighbor activity, and 48 has occasional neighbor sightings), 48 in the other bedroom (where 40 and 44 have neighbor activity, 48 is almost completely silent, but 36 has some activity from neighbors across the street), and 165 for the AP downstairs (because it's wide open and unused by anyone in my neighborhood). The only reason I wouldn't use 165 for everything is simply to give each AP the maximum possible amount of uncongested bandwidth (they use wired ethernet to connect together).So... for now, I'm deducting one star, mainly because I'm still freaked out about not being able to manually specify channel or output power, and its inability/refusal to use channel 165 (IMHO, the best 5GHz channel of all)... but I'm tentatively giving it enough benefit of doubt to earn 4 stars, since I don't have any complaints about its actual performance yet. Nevertheless, when the time comes to replace it in 2-3 years (to gain 60GHz 802.11ad and 6GHz WiFi6E/7), I'll probably stick to the Omada-series gear so I can feel better about having more granular configuration options.