TP-Link 2.4GHz N300 Long Range Outdoor CPE for PtP and PtMP Transmission | Point to Point Wireless Bridge | 9dBi, 5km+ | Passive PoE Powered w/Free PoE Injector | Pharos Control (CPE210)

STRONG signal. It's an antenna, what else can be said? It's a big flaky to get setup, you'll need to have a basic understanding of IP addresses and how to temporarily adjust the adapter in your own computer to get through the initial configuration, but once that's done, it produces a very strong signal. I have both the CPE210 for a specific application, and the TP-Link EAP650 outdoor antenna. Both work very well and both produce robust signals.

This CPE is great. I've used this in a setup for a family member to get internet out to their gazebo that is about 150ft from their house. Streaming video for watching NFL games, MLB games, movies etc works great without issue. It's an awesome setup! With that, I decided to get one myself to have internet in my detached shop. It's only about 50 feet from my house. I have this device configured as a client to my home wireless network and then running to a small WIFI router in my shop that is in AP mode. Standing in the same room about 20 feet from my home WIFI router it was getting about 75mbps download (2.4ghz band) and with my setup to my shop I get about 60mbps in my shop. So it's a solid connection. Here's the thing that some people MAY be overlooking if they are running a similar setup. I have a 1gbps internet connection. That's NOT the speed I can expect over wireless. If I were to use the 5ghz band I can get decent throughput but I'd have to be pretty close to the home router. Anyway, this CPE says 300mbps throughput in the 2.4 ghz band. IF you were to get that throughput that is ONLY to the CPE, NOT to anything that is using it to access the internet. The catch (for me) was the ethernet port. It's a 10/100mbps so that's where the bottleneck is in my scenario. The fastest I could hope to get is 100mbps. For me, there's nothing wrong with that and it will work great. I'm sure for a lot of people's needs this will work great. I just wanted to put it out there in case people had certain expectations. If ou really need the greater speeds, get the TP-Link CPE710 as it has the 10/100/1000mbps ethernet connection and the ethernet interface won't be the bottleneck any longer. Bottom line: Good, reliable, quality product. 100% recommend!

I'm a certified network engineer with over 20 years experience, so keep that in mind. I work on network devices like this every day. So far I like the TP Link wifi bridge. We are connecting a guest house to the main house internet connection. The guest house is 400-500 feet away from the main house. The main house (transmitter, or Access Point) is mounted outside. The guest house receiver (client) is actually indoors, facing the main house, with direct line of site, resting against the exterior wall of the guest house. This is the 3rd network bridge I've setup for this situation. The prior two solutions were from engenius. However, I like the TP Link solution better for the following reasons: 1. the web interface to manage the devices has a few more options and is easier to use, in my opinion. 2. The devices utilize 10/100 Mbps wired ethernet ports. Although this is counter-intuitive (how can you get 300Mbps wifi when the Access Point is only 100Mbps?). However, in my experience, these wifi bridges are MORE RELIABLE when the uplink is only 100Mbps. If you are ONLY downloading from the internet, the gigabit ethernet devices work well. However, if you are trying to work remotely from the remote location, you need reliable uploads as well. In this situation, 10/100 ethernet seems to be more reliable. The TPLink bridge solution uses a priority connection protocol (not an industry standard) when using two TP Link access points. This seems to work well, as advertised. With a simple button option you can change the priority from Throughput (for streaming downloaded video, for instance) to Latency (for using video calling, Voice over IP (VOIP) calling, etc). This option does seem to work well, and it only has to be enabled on the receiving end (the "client"), and not on the transmitting end (the "Access Point"). Also, switching the setting doesn't require a reboot of the client device so you can make that change on-the-fly. There is an important setup tip which applies to any wifi bridge solution that you end up choosing: You need a computer with a physical ethernet port to connect to the devices for the first time. I have a few MacBook laptops, and none of them have a physical port. I ended changing my home wifi ip address to match the devices (192.168.0.x), and plugged the devices into our existing wifi router. Then I could connect to them to program them, change their default IP address, etc. I downloaded the user manual from the internet before they arrived and read through it a few times, so by the time they arrived I knew exactly how to program them for our situation. Another reason I went with TP Link is, our home wifi router is TP Link and I've been happy with that device as well. Most of the wifi bridges that you see on Amazon are from mysterious companies that I never heard of. When I finally found the TP Link, I was much more confident ordering it. I hope this helps your decision.

I got two of these to provide internet connection to my detached garage for security cameras. The distance is at least 200ft and the first 20-30 ft go through the attic of my condo and my neighbor's. The first one is in the attic as an AP (access point) (Ethernet to the router) pointing at the direction of the garage (the condo rules don't allow me to put it outside). Like I said, between my condo and the garage there is another condo. The second unit is also in the garage (cannot have it outside) as a repeater. My phone sees the AP from the condo but the Internet is not usable. If I use the second unit as a repeater, I get a solid 5 to 15 Mbps. Mind you I haven't optimized their placement yet, I just placed them quickly to check the connection. I should be able to raise both units a few more feet and potentially improve the signal/penetration a bit. The RF of the units seem very solid and I love their interface. Many parameters to configure and monitor the connection status. The units support as low as 5MHz BW which can help with very long distances, however, my phone wouldn't connect with anything less than 20 MHz (couldn't see the AP). I guess less than 20MHz can be used when one unit is AP and other one a client. Finally, this setup is less than 1/3 of the cost of another WIFI repeater system by CC Vector, it offers a better interface and actually works. The CC Vector gave me a 25% signal but no usable Internet. Update April 20th, 2019: Before mounting the units higher, occasionally the upload speed from the garage to the condo would be practically unusable. I suspect interference from one of the several other APs in the condo complex (the survey tool picked up 96 APs!). I was able to make the connection more stable by changing the channel, and limiting the max speed and bandwidth (again it is very nice to have these options). After that I got around to mount the units higher which helped to make the signal more stable and I didn't have problems since. In order to be able to use a bandwidth less than 20 Mhz and set the unit in the garage in the client mode, I bought a cheap router (TL-WR940N, about the same price as an AP only) that I connected to the client CPE210. Originally, the router was set as an AP but I ended up using it as a router for utilizing data filtering options that were not available at the AP mode. If I had a line-of-sight I would have used the 5GHz CPE units since the 5Ghz band is less crowded. I am pretty sure the 5Ghz signal wouldn't fair well going through multiple walls and roofs. Still, very pleased and I hope they last a long time.

There is so much to potentially like about this product but ultimately I never got it to work in the field. This product fits in a difficult niche: offering features beyond the capability of most SOHO devices, but clearly not catering to network professionals. This requires relying on a web interface instead of CLI. Worst of all is that you MUST go through the quick config before you can get into the details of config through the web interface. Quick config determines what the interfaces are named (the ETH interface can be called LAN or WAN depending on which quick config you choose, etc). Quick config also forces you into routing or bridging, but you'd be hard pressed to figure that out from the documentation because it is severely dumbed down to the point of being essentially meaningless. All the docs will do is walk you through one "recipe" config to get a web cam attached to a single computer that is not already on any existing network. Not enough details for anyone who understands TCP/IP to know what's going on, too much information for the average home user to do anything with other than follow the recipe. The most frustrating feature of all is what appears to be a late addition to the product's security. To extend an existing network you need to be in "AP Router" quick config apparently. This causes the ETH interface to be named WAN since they assume it's hooked directly to the internet. It also forces the WLAN interface into bridge mode instead of routing mode and calls the interface BRIDGE. All of this would be fine but to protect the users from themselves it immediately deactivates the web interface on the ETH "WAN" port to prevent hackers from getting in to your modem. Anybody see the problem with that yet? Yep, you are essentially locked out of ALL the advanced features because there is no longer any way to get into the web interface. If it doesn't work, and you only get 6 questions in quick config to choose from, you need to factory reset and start over and get locked out again. After probably 2 dozen factory resets and some help from the forum deciphering what the instructions actually meant, I did get it working in the lab. It worked great actually and as frustrating as the VERY limited quick config choices were, they did force me into a working bridging config. It wasn't how I wanted it to work but it worked. Here I hit the biggest frustration of all: it doesn't act consistently after hard resets. I typically want to see multiple power cycles in the lab to have confidence that it works and take it out into the field. It just doesn't work that reliably. Sometimes it comes up on the manually set IP address, sometimes it reverts back to factory default. Sometimes the DHCP server starts, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes it comes up split brain where it remembered the WLAN settings but forgets the LAN settings, and sometimes it just reboots itself continuously and can never even be pinged on LAN. After a couple of dozen more factory resets (in hindsight it must have been acting erratically all along) I had what seemed like a working config. It survived 3 power cycles in the lab so I took it in the field. Local ethernet never once came up, had the DHCP server start, and not spontaneously reboot. I've wasted hours on this thing, time to return it unfortunately and try a more expensive option. Too bad, they clearly spent a lot of time on this product and I really wanted it to work for me.

UPDATE….I have now used this product for over a year to transmit WiFi from my cabin to a metal shed 100 yards away. It has performed flawlessly. Not a single hiccup. I use it primarily for WiFi calling/texts/internet searches on my phone. I added a wireless security camera so I can watch over the tractor, 4 wheelers, boat, etc when I’m not there. I added smart switches so I can switch off the shed lights at 10pm when I look out the cabin window and realize I left them on. Finally I put in a television with a Roku with the Tablo app to wirelessly access the cabin TV antenna. I can now turn on the football/basketball/etc game while I putz around with my chores. It works surprisingly well. Original Review…I spend a lot of time in a metal building barn 100 yards from my cabin. My eero mesh in the cabin will not penetrate the metal building. I purchased 2 of these cpe510 units. I installed one as the host in the cabin connected by Ethernet to the primary eero router. The other is mounted outside the metal barn with an Ethernet cable running inside to another eero router. IT WORKS! Coverage in the shed is excellent. No more walking outside the shed to make a call, send a text, or do a search. No more stopping work when I’m expecting a call. I am very pleased. I must say, the setup of the antennae was unusually difficult. The provided instructions were pitifully inadequate. I am handy, but no IT expert. Among many other steps, you are required to set separate static IP addresses for the host and client antennae. Even drafting that sentence makes my eyes glaze over. 🙄. I could not have completed it without the patient assistance of Edemer Nunez at TP Link support. He spent 45 minutes in the phone shepherding me through the setup process. Whatever they are paying him…it’s not enough. I own several products from TP Link. Particularly the Kasa 360 degree cameras. Excellent products that are easy to install and use. Not so with the CPE 510. The product works well. TP Link must simplify the installation process, AND, give Edemer a raise!

ultimately the cpe510 does do an excellent job of delivering high speed wifi but there are lots of pitfalls to be aware of. the first thing to know is that 13dBi is just barely enough to reach the wifi hotspot that is less than a block away (1 block = ~ 500 feet). if you are in an RV you should look for a bigger more powerful antenna, this is unlikely to work for you. also anything less than 3 bars on the cpe510 meter (about 73db) and I could not get a reliable connection. if you have two cpe510s talking to each other apparently you can get this to work up to 10 miles. but when talking to an ordinary access point your range is much less. another thing to be very aware of is that unlike most wifi routers, this is not dual band, it ONLY supports the 5GHz range. some devices especially older cellphones don't work with 5GHz and require the 2.4GHz band. if I had realized this before I bought it I probably would have gotten something else. thankfully it didn't matter for my specific use case, everything I want to use it with is 5GHz capable. I specifically wanted to use this with an xfinitywifi hotspot (long story about areas of internet inaccessibility omitted) but I very nearly sent this back because it wouldn't work, it would connect but no traffic would pass. I spent several very frustrating hours online chatting with TP-Link tech support. two different techs were clueless about how to solve the problem and there was nothing in their knowledge-base about it., [update: a tech support supervisor contacted me to apologize for their techs failing to solve my problem, and we had a great conversation, they have now added this solution (below) to their knowledge-base so that in future anyone seeking help can be given the answer. I was very impressed by their response - you can expect super excellent tech support from TP-Link] I also spent many hours searching the internet trying to find an answer for why this wasn't working with xfinitywifi. so after days of trying different things and endless frustration and searching I finally got it to work and here is the answer that you need. xfinitywifi requires you to have a paid account that you login to (despite their claims about free access during covid) in order to use their hotspots. but what is not apparent is that they also register and keep track of the individual devices that you are using to connect with. none of that is actually a problem though. except.. for when it is. what is a major problem is that this link is nearly impossible to find, this is the list of YOUR registered devices. I don't know why they hide this link but they do at least as of when I am writing this. https://customer.xfinity.com/#/settings/security/hotspot-devices in ~Bridge~ Mode the router is supposed to be transparent/invisible when it forwards the packets from one connection to the other. But I was unable to get that to work with the cpe510 and that is a huge problem which prevents it from working with xfinitywifi. thankfully there is a work-around (other than replacing the firmware with dd-wrt which voids your warranty). what you need to do is to get the cpe510 registered with xfinitywifi as one of your authorized devices. until it is registered as a known/approved device xfinity will refuse to allow traffic to flow to/through it. now the catch is that there is not any way to directly register the cpe510 with xfinitywifi. so instead you configure your laptop to pretend that it is the cpe510 and then you register your laptop with xfinitywifi. this will trick xfinitywifi into accepting the cpe510 as an approved device. what you have to do is to open up the cpe510 status page on your browser and find the MAC Address: the cpe has 2 MAC Addresses, the one that you want is in the WAN section, if you use the one from the LAN section this won't work, so make sure you get the correct one. Now for the tricky bit, I can't tell you specifically how to do this because it depends on your operating system and even varies by version and updates so you will have to search this out, once you know how it is actually very simple to do. But what you want is to temporarily set the wifi card of your laptop to use the MAC Address of the cpe510. on my laptop this entry is called Cloned MAC Address and is in the network settings. You just put the cpe510's MAC Address in that address field and you are all set. Now take your laptop to someplace where the signal is strong enough for you to directly connect your laptop to xfinitywifi. it can be any hotspot it does not have to be the same one that you intend to use with the cpe510. now just connect your laptop and login to xfinity. login.xfinity.com and then verify that the MAC Address of the cpe510 now shows up in the list of your registered devices. you also have to configure the cpe510 for WISP Mode That's it you are done!!! your cpe510 will now be allowed to connect to xfinitywifi hotspots (any hotspot). be sure to reset your laptop's wifi card back to normal where it is using it's own MAC Address and not the cpe510s MAC Address. it's a bit of a headache, but if you are familiar with network settings this is a simple task. finding this info however took a huge effort, so here is my gift to you. Enjoy! bottom line, if you can find a strong enough signal for the cpe510 and you get the MAC Address registered following the above procedure (takes about 15 minutes plus moving the laptop) then the cpe510 does do an excellent job of delivering high speed internet via an xfinitywifi connection. P.S. this only applies to xfinitywifi , for any other use the cpe510 works fine without jumping through any hoops.

*5 month update* while im still not thrilled about the false advertising mentioned below, I am a bit impressed by this. in bridge mode this thing is rock solid stable. I have not had a single issue with this loosing connection to my main router, it just works. this provides a data connection to a remote POE switch that runs six POE security cameras, three of those are 4K cameras. I couldn't ask for better reliability. I do have ping watch dog enabled on the unit so if it cant ping my routers IP it will auto reboot after 3 failed pings 1 minute apart, so it is possible it could loose connection from time to time but it fixes itself before I notice. while this will work for my needs it looses 3 stars for blatant false advertising. while the wireless does have a theoretical connection speed of 300mbps the ethernet port is only 10/100. in bridge mode using the ethernet as the output I cant use the max bandwidth. doing a speed test I only get 93mbps throughput out of the ethernet port. another major issue is this item does not adhere to normal POE standards i was hoping my outdoor POE switch would power this but when connected the switch doesn't indicate a device connected to the port and the AP doesn't power up, I have to use the included POE injector. this is an issue since the POE switch is hardwired and has no outlets near it. I'm considering cutting the plug off the injector and hardwiring it inside the housing with the POE switch. don't get me wrong, like most TP link items, this unit is quality but if it had a gigabit ethernet port like it should have had and followed normal POE standards instead of requiring the included injector it could have been much better. Photos are of my completed remote security cam POE switch using this as it’s connection to my network. I haven’t deployed it yet. Due to the Poe issue I mention above I had to glue the included POE injector into the enclosure and cut the plug off to hard wire it. I know it the pics the ground isn’t covered with shrink wrap and that is because it doesn’t have to be, the ground shorting to the case is a good thing. The hot and neutral wires have shrink wrap to protect against short circuits. Not much room left in the enclosure for 8 camera drops but I’ll manage. *UPDATE* this device does actually follow a POE standard, its just passive POE. My switch is for active POE devices. a vast majority of POE devices are active. Passive is a cheaper standard to follow. Passive POE will not work with active since active POE switched communicate with the powered device to determine its power needs. the switch cant negotiate with passive devices so it just ignores that something was plugged in.