OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Routers Methodology v3.0
Routers Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Routers Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Routers Methodology v3.0

Tenda F3 review: 77 specs compared

Avg. price:~£20Wi-Fi version:Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n)Wi-Fi speed:300 MbpsLAN port speeds:100 MbpsMesh Wi-Fi:?

Tenda F3 Review: Compare 77 technical specifications, 5 expert and video reviews and 1 best-of list to see how this product ranks in the Routers category and whether it is worth buying.

Tenda F3
6.7/10

Overall score

Score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 88% of models
Score components

40%

6.7

Technical score

25%

6.7

Reviews score

25%

6.7

List score

10%

6.7

Sentiment score

▼Worse than 88% of routers
7.7

Value for money

Value for money
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the router's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a router with a good balance between network performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 88% of models
Score components

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

10

Price

▼Worse than 88%
6.7

Technical score

Technical score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 67% of models
Score components

26%

5.6

Wireless

20%

5.2

Ports

18%

8.4

Networking

14%

8.8

Security

12%

6.1

Hardware

10%

7.2

Management

▼Worse than 67%
6.7

Reviews score

Reviews score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.7 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 80% of models

6.7

Mark 8.1 is below the typical mark 8.1 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

8.2

Average grade

20%

8.0

Popularity

Grades by review (5)
2 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 3 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 80%
6.7

List score

List score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (1)
List score: in 1 of 84 lists (1%)
▲Better than 70%
  • tenda-f3
  • tenda-f3
  • tenda-f3
  • tenda-f3
  • tenda-f3
  • tenda-f3
  • tenda-f3
  • tenda-f3
tenda-f3
tenda-f3
tenda-f3
tenda-f3
tenda-f3
tenda-f3
tenda-f3
tenda-f3
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Tenda F3

Based on 2 · 3

Reviewers agree setup is effortless and it's great value, but the limited Wi-Fi bands and older standard hold it back.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the Tenda F3

Based on 137 owners sharing their experience in online comments

20%positive7%mixed73%negative

Owners value easy setup and years of reliability, but many report weak coverage, slow speeds, and unstable connections.

What owners dislike

  • Connection drops repeatedly, especially with several devices online, in extender or WISP mode, or after a reset.20
  • Speed through the Tenda often falls well short of the main router, with some owners getting about 20 Mbps against 45 Mbps.15
  • Devices join the Wi-Fi but get no internet access, even over a LAN cable, and a restart may bring it back only briefly.11
  • After a firmware update the settings page can load blank or redirect to the setup wizard, and some owners cannot log in in access point mode.9
  • The router can suddenly die, showing only a power light and no LAN; some units stopped detecting after being unplugged and replugged.8
  • Owners report weak signal, with one bar or about 20% at under 20 metres, and poor reach through walls, trees and into the next room.8
  • The Wi-Fi network sometimes disappears entirely after a reset or firmware update, even though the power light is on.6
  • Speed is capped near 100 Mbps on both Wi-Fi and LAN, even on plans of 200 to 500 Mbps.5
  • Firmware upgrades can fail with an error that restarts the router within seconds, and a wrong firmware file has left some units without Wi-Fi.5
  • The router restarts on its own, sometimes after only a few minutes and sometimes after about six hours of continuous use.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of router Tenda F3

Technical score
Technical score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 67% of models
Score components:

26%

5.6

Wireless

20%

5.2

Ports

18%

8.4

Networking

14%

8.8

Security

12%

6.1

Hardware

10%

7.2

Management

6.7
Reviews score
6.7
List score
6.7
Value for money
Value for money
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the router's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a router with a good balance between network performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 88% of models
Score components:

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

10

Price

7.7
Brand name
Tenda
Wi-Fi version
Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n)
This router uses Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n), which is less advanced than 65% of routers and equal to 32.7% of routers.
Wi-Fi bands
2.4 GHz
This router supports 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi bands, which are less versatile than 76% of routers and equal to 21.6% of routers.
Wi-Fi speed
300 Mbps
Market range: <0 Mbps – >6k Mbps
This router delivers 300 Mbps Wi-Fi speed, which is lower than 75.8% of routers and equal to 16.7% of routers.
Channel widths supported
20 MHz + 40 MHz
This router supports 20 MHz + 40 MHz channel width options, which is fewer than 63.7% of routers and the same as 31.2% of routers.
Show more
What reviewers say
Wi-Fi security protocols
WPA2, WPA, WEP, WPS
This router supports WPA2, WPA, WEP, WPS Wi-Fi security protocols, which are less advanced than 69.1% of routers and equal to 9.4% of routers.
DoS protection
yes
This router includes DoS protection. 9.8% of routers include DoS protection.
SPI intrusion protection
yes
This router includes SPI-based intrusion protection. 4.7% of routers include SPI-based intrusion protection.
MAC address filtering
yes
This router supports MAC address filtering. 1.7% of routers include MAC address filtering.
URL filter
yes
This router supports URL filtering. 2.6% of routers include URL filtering.
Show more
IPv6 support
yes
This router supports IPv6. 8.8% of routers are IPv6-ready.
Dynamic routing
no
This router does not support dynamic routing. 46.2% of routers support dynamic routing.
Inter-VLAN routing
?
VLAN tagging
?
QoS
yes
This router includes QoS controls. 2.4% of routers include QoS controls.
Show more
N. of LAN ports
3
Market range: <0 – >5
This router has 3 LAN ports, which is fewer than 66% of routers and the same as 18.2% of routers.
LAN port speeds
100 Mbps
This router offers 100 Mbps on its LAN ports, which is slower than 74.5% of routers and on par with 25.1% of routers.
N. of WAN ports
1
Market range: <0 – >5
This router has 1 WAN ports, which is more than 0.8% of routers and the same as 89.4% of routers.
N. of USB ports
?
Power over Ethernet (PoE)
no
This router does not support Power over Ethernet (PoE). 1.7% of routers can be powered over Ethernet.
Show more
Management interface
Web UI, App
This router uses Web UI, App for management, which is more advanced than 29.7% of routers and equal to 60.9% of routers.
Firmware upgrade method
Web UI, App
This router supports Web UI, App firmware update methods, which are more convenient than 62.3% of routers and equal to 8.4% of routers.
Traffic monitoring
yes
This router includes traffic monitoring. 13.9% of routers include traffic monitoring.
Guest Wi-Fi network
yes
This router offers a guest Wi‑Fi network. 7.3% of routers offer a guest Wi‑Fi network.
Captive portal
no
This router does not offer captive portal features. 22.4% of routers offer captive portal features.
Show more
CPU clock speed
?
RAM capacity
32 MB
Market range: <0 MB – >1k MB
This router has 32 MB of RAM, which is less than 84% of routers and the same as 11.6% of routers.
Internal storage
0.001953 GB
Market range: <0 GB – >0.5 GB
This router has 0.001953 GB of internal storage, which is less than 87.3% of routers and the same as 12.7% of routers.
Hardware acceleration
yes
This router offers hardware acceleration. 24.9% of routers offer hardware acceleration.
N. of external antennas
3
Market range: <0 – >10
This router has 3 external antennas, which is more than 57.9% of routers and the same as 11.8% of routers.
Show more

Tenda F3 vs the average router

246810TotalWirelessSecurityNetworkingPortsManagementHardware
  • 6.2 W lower power consumption
    This router uses less power than the average router (1.9 W vs 8.1 W). The average router uses 8.1 W power.
    1.9 W vs 8.1 W
  • 4.75x cheaper
    Tenda F3 is cheaper than the average router (£20 vs £95).
    £20 vs £95
  • Stronger Wi-Fi security
    This router supports the Wi-Fi security protocols WPA2, WPA, WEP, WPS, while the average router supports WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WEP.
    WPA2, WPA, WEP, WPS vs WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WEP
  • 26.4 mm lower height
    This router is shorter than the average router (25 mm vs 51.4 mm). The average router is 51.4 mm tall.
    25 mm vs 51.4 mm
  • 1 more external antennas
    This router has more external antennas than the average router (3 vs 2). The average router has 2 external antennas.
    3 vs 2
  • 4.75x cheaper
    Tenda F3 is cheaper than the average router (£20 vs £95).
    £20 vs £95
  • Stronger Wi-Fi security
    This router supports the Wi-Fi security protocols WPA2, WPA, WEP, WPS, while the average router supports WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WEP.
    WPA2, WPA, WEP, WPS vs WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WEP
  • 6.2 W lower power consumption
    This router uses less power than the average router (1.9 W vs 8.1 W). The average router uses 8.1 W power.
    1.9 W vs 8.1 W
  • 26.4 mm lower height
    This router is shorter than the average router (25 mm vs 51.4 mm). The average router is 51.4 mm tall.
    25 mm vs 51.4 mm
  • 1 more external antennas
    This router has more external antennas than the average router (3 vs 2). The average router has 2 external antennas.
    3 vs 2
  • Slower LAN ports
    This router has a lower LAN port speed than the average router (100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps). The average router has a LAN port speed of 1 Gbps.
    100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps
  • Older Wi-Fi version
    This router uses an older Wi-Fi version than the average router (Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)). The average router uses Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac).
    Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)
  • 1 fewer LAN ports
    This router has fewer LAN ports than the average router (3 vs 4). The average router has 4 LAN ports.
    3 vs 4
  • Fewer Wi-Fi bands
    This router supports fewer Wi-Fi bands than the average router (2.4 GHz vs 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz). The average router supports 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz Wi-Fi bands.
    2.4 GHz vs 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz
  • 82.9% slower Wi-Fi speed
    This router has a lower Wi-Fi speed than the average router (300 Mbps vs 1,750 Mbps). The average router reaches Wi-Fi speed of 1,750 Mbps.
    300 Mbps vs 1,750 Mbps
  • No MU-MIMO
    This router does not support MU-MIMO, while the average router does. 54% of routers support MU-MIMO.
  • 17.3% lower list score
    List score
    6.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
    How we count it
    Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
    Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
    Lists with this model (1)
    List score: in 1 of 84 lists (1%)
    6.7 vs 8.1
  • 98.4% less internal storage
    This router has less internal storage than the average router (0 GB vs 0.1 GB). The average router offers 0.125 GB of internal storage.
    0.001953 GB vs 0.125 GB
  • 17.3% lower list score
    List score
    6.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
    How we count it
    Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
    Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
    Lists with this model (1)
    List score: in 1 of 84 lists (1%)
    6.7 vs 8.1
  • 13.0% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.7 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 80% of models

    6.7

    Mark 8.1 is below the typical mark 8.1 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    8.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (5)
    2 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 3 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    6.7 vs 7.7
  • 14.1% lower sentiment score
    6.7 vs 7.8
  • 5% worse value for money
    Tenda F3 has worse value for money than the average router (7.69 vs 8.1).
    7.69 vs 8.08
  • Older Wi-Fi version
    This router uses an older Wi-Fi version than the average router (Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)). The average router uses Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac).
    Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)
  • Fewer Wi-Fi bands
    This router supports fewer Wi-Fi bands than the average router (2.4 GHz vs 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz). The average router supports 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz Wi-Fi bands.
    2.4 GHz vs 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz
  • 82.9% slower Wi-Fi speed
    This router has a lower Wi-Fi speed than the average router (300 Mbps vs 1,750 Mbps). The average router reaches Wi-Fi speed of 1,750 Mbps.
    300 Mbps vs 1,750 Mbps
  • No MU-MIMO
    This router does not support MU-MIMO, while the average router does. 54% of routers support MU-MIMO.
  • Narrower channel widths
    This router has a lower supported channel width than the average router (20 MHz + 40 MHz vs 20 MHz + 40 MHz + 80 MHz). The average router supports channel width of 20 MHz + 40 MHz + 80 MHz.
    20 MHz + 40 MHz vs 20 MHz + 40 MHz + 80 MHz
  • No band steering
    This router does not support band steering, while the average router does. 57.6% of routers support band steering.
  • No beamforming
    This router does not support beamforming, while the average router does. 62.1% of routers support beamforming.
  • Slower LAN ports
    This router has a lower LAN port speed than the average router (100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps). The average router has a LAN port speed of 1 Gbps.
    100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps
  • 1 fewer LAN ports
    This router has fewer LAN ports than the average router (3 vs 4). The average router has 4 LAN ports.
    3 vs 4
  • Limited firmware updates
    This router supports the firmware update methods Web UI, App, while the average router supports Web UI, App, Automatic.
    Web UI, App vs Web UI, App, Automatic
  • No DLNA support
    This router does not support DLNA, while the average router does. 50.4% of routers support DLNA.
  • Less capable NAS services
    This router includes none NAS services, while the average router includes SMB, media server.
    none vs SMB, media server
  • 98.4% less internal storage
    This router has less internal storage than the average router (0 GB vs 0.1 GB). The average router offers 0.125 GB of internal storage.
    0.001953 GB vs 0.125 GB
  • 87.5% less RAM
    This router has less RAM than the average router (32 MB vs 256 MB). The average router has 256 MB of RAM.
    32 MB vs 256 MB
  • 5 years older release date
    This router is an older model than the average router (2014 vs 2019). The average router release year is 2019.
    2014 vs 2019
  • 33 mm thicker design
    This router is thicker than the average router (87 mm vs 54 mm). The average router is 54 mm thick.
    87 mm vs 54 mm

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

7.0
Ribby Trivia
≈ estimated
27/05/2022
Setup walkthrough · phone setup and speed test
Verdict
Tenda F3 is cheap and easy to set up, works from a LAN port, but supports only 2.4 GHz.
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
gadget.ro
≈ estimated
30/06/2017
Hands-on test · Single-band router
Verdict
The Tenda F3 is a simple router whose three antennas give wide coverage in a block flat or small house, but its 100Mbps ports hold back fast internet plans.
8.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
03/06/2016
Lab test · Single-band router
Verdict
The Tenda F3 is an easy-to-set-up router for one or two devices doing light browsing, but its slow older Wi-Fi limits large transfers and games.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Tenda F3

  • Among the lowest-cost ways to add home Wi-Fi
  • High-power 5 dBi antennas for longer reach
  • WPS button for quick device pairing
  • Wi-Fi 4 N300 is enough for browsing and streaming
  • Guest Wi-Fi network and QoS included
  • Light 213 g body, easy to place

What customers don't like about Tenda F3

  • Wi-Fi 4 only, 300 Mbps on 2.4 GHz
  • No 5 GHz band, so busy buildings feel crowded
  • 100 Mbps Ethernet ports limit fast fibre plans
  • No built-in modem, external modem required
  • No MU-MIMO or beamforming

Verdict

Tenda's F3 is a very basic Wi-Fi router and one of the cheapest ways to get a wireless network running. Wi-Fi 4 on the 2.4 GHz band tops out at 300 Mbps, which handles browsing and everyday streaming, but a crowded apartment block will feel the lack of a 5 GHz band. Two things help: high-power 5 dBi antennas and a WPS button for quick pairing. The wired ports run at 100 Mbps only, so they cap any fast fibre plan well below its speed. There is no modem, so a separate broadband modem or fibre box must supply the connection. Guest Wi-Fi and QoS are available, yet basic 802.11n hardware has no beamforming or MU-MIMO. It suits a spare room, a holiday home or a first router for light use on a tight budget.

Compare Tenda F3 with other routers

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Tenda F3 and other routers

No results found