OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS

TP-Link Archer C1200 Review | 77 Data compared

Avg. price in UK:~£60Avg. price in US:~$70Wi-Fi version:Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)Wi-Fi speed:1200 MbpsLAN port speeds:1 Gbps + 100 MbpsMesh Wi-Fi:no

TP-Link Archer C1200 Review: Compare 77 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Routers category and whether it is worth buying.

7.1

Overall score

Score
7.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the router's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best routers on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 54% of models
Score components

90%

6.9

Technical Score

10%

8.9

User score

â–²Better than 54% of routers
6.9

Technical Score

Technical score
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the router's technical performance, covering key areas such as Wi-Fi performance, wired connectivity, security, software features, coverage, and design.
When it matters
When you want to compare routers based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
Score components

26%

5.5

Wireless

20%

6.1

Ports

18%

8.2

Networking

14%

8.4

Security

12%

5.9

Hardware

10%

8.5

Management

â–¼Worse than 53% of routers
8.9

User score

User score
8.9/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the router.
When it matters
When you want to know how a router performs in daily use and how reliable it is for speed, coverage, and stability according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 88% of models
Score components

70%

8.4

User reviews

30%

9.9

Popularity

User score:
United Kingdom
amazon
4.2
(6634)
amazon
4.3
(1120)
amazon
4.4
(334)
United States
Amazon_logo.png
4.2
(6832)
Amazon_logo.png
4.3
(1119)
Amazon_logo.png
4.4
(326)

(Reviews last updated: May 2026)

â–²Better than 88% of routers
  • tp-link-archer-c1200
  • tp-link-archer-c1200
  • tp-link-archer-c1200
  • tp-link-archer-c1200
  • tp-link-archer-c1200
  • tp-link-archer-c1200
  • tp-link-archer-c1200
tp-link-archer-c1200
tp-link-archer-c1200
tp-link-archer-c1200
tp-link-archer-c1200
tp-link-archer-c1200
tp-link-archer-c1200
tp-link-archer-c1200

Best prices in UK

Best rankings

Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Verdict

The TP-Link Archer C1200 is a dual-band Wi-Fi 5 router offering combined speeds of up to 1200 Mbps, with 867 Mbps on the 5 GHz band and 300 Mbps on the 2.4 GHz band. It features a Broadcom 900 MHz processor, 128 MB of RAM, and three external antennas equipped with beamforming technology for stable coverage in medium-sized homes. Key hardware includes four Gigabit LAN ports for high-speed wired connections, one Gigabit WAN port, and a USB 2.0 port for media and printer sharing. Its main pros are the affordable entry-level pricing, easy management via the Use code with caution.Copied to clipboardjsonTP-Link Tether appUse code with caution.Copied to clipboardjson, and strong 5 GHz performance for its class. However, notable cons include weak signal penetration through multiple thick walls, an older USB 2.0 standard rather than 3.0, and occasional stability issues in high-traffic environments with many simultaneous 4K streams.

Technical Specifications of router TP-Link Archer C1200

Technical Score
Technical score
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the router's technical performance, covering key areas such as Wi-Fi performance, wired connectivity, security, software features, coverage, and design.
When it matters
When you want to compare routers based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
Score components:

26%

5.5

Wireless

20%

6.1

Ports

18%

8.2

Networking

14%

8.4

Security

12%

5.9

Hardware

10%

8.5

Management

6.9
TP-Link Archer C1200 has a technical score of 6.9 points, which is lower than that of 52.9% of products in this category.
User score
User score
8.9/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the router.
When it matters
When you want to know how a router performs in daily use and how reliable it is for speed, coverage, and stability according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 88% of models
Score components

70%

8.4

User reviews

30%

9.9

Popularity

User score:
United Kingdom
amazon
4.2
(6634)
amazon
4.3
(1120)
amazon
4.4
(334)
United States
Amazon_logo.png
4.2
(6832)
Amazon_logo.png
4.3
(1119)
Amazon_logo.png
4.4
(326)

(Reviews last updated: May 2026)

8.9
TP-Link Archer C1200 has a user score of 8.88 points, which is higher than that of 88.5% of products in this category.
Popularity
Popularity
9.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the router.
When it matters
When you prefer to choose a router reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 91% of models
Popularity:
TP-Link Archer C1200 has a popularity score of 9.9 points, which is higher than that of 91.2% of products in this category.
9.9
TP-Link Archer C1200 has a popularity score of 9.9 points, which is higher than that of 91.2% of products in this category.
Ratio quality/price
Value for money
7.9/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 54% of models
Score components:

60%

7.1

Overall score

40%

10

Price

7.9
TP-Link Archer C1200 has a value-for-money score of 7.9 points, which is higher than that of 53.7% of products in this category.
Brand name
TP-Link
Wi-Fi version
Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)
Wi-Fi version
Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)
â–² Better than 39% of models
This router uses Wi-Fi Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac), which is more advanced than 39.5% of routers and equal to 25.3% of routers.
Wi-Fi bands
2.4 GHz + 5 GHz
Wi-Fi bands
2.4 GHz + 5 GHz
â–² Better than 25% of models
This router supports 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz Wi-Fi bands, which are more versatile than 24.8% of routers and equal to 68.1% of routers.
Wi-Fi speed
1,200 Mbps
Wi-Fi speed
1,200 Mbps
â–¼ Worse than 52% of models
Market range: <0 Mbps – >6k Mbps
This router delivers 1,200 Mbps Wi-Fi speed, which is lower than 52.1% of routers and equal to 5.8% of routers.
Channel widths supported
20 MHz + 40 MHz + 80 MHz
Channel widths supported
20 MHz + 40 MHz + 80 MHz
â–² Better than 41% of models
This router supports 20 MHz + 40 MHz + 80 MHz channel width options, which is more than 40.9% of routers and the same as 31.6% of routers.
Show more
Wi-Fi security protocols
WPA/WPA2, WEP, 802.1X
Wi-Fi security protocols
WPA/WPA2, WEP, 802.1X
â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
This router supports WPA/WPA2, WEP, 802.1X Wi-Fi security protocols, which are less advanced than 97.8% of routers and equal to 0.5% of routers.
DoS protection
yes
DoS protection
yes
â–² Better than 13% of models
This router includes DoS protection. 12.8% of routers include DoS protection.
SPI intrusion protection
yes
SPI intrusion protection
yes
â–² Better than 6% of models
This router includes SPI-based intrusion protection. 6.1% of routers include SPI-based intrusion protection.
MAC address filtering
yes
MAC address filtering
yes
â–² Better than 2% of models
This router supports MAC address filtering. 2.2% of routers include MAC address filtering.
URL filter
no
URL filter
no
â–¼ Worse than 97% of models
This router does not support URL filtering. 96.8% of routers include URL filtering.
Show more
IPv6 support
yes
IPv6 support
yes
â–² Better than 12% of models
This router supports IPv6. 11.5% of routers are IPv6-ready.
Dynamic routing
no
Dynamic routing
no
â–¼ Worse than 52% of models
This router does not support dynamic routing. 52.5% of routers support dynamic routing.
Inter-VLAN routing
no
Inter-VLAN routing
no
â–¼ Worse than 24% of models
This router does not support inter-VLAN routing. 23.5% of routers support inter-VLAN routing.
VLAN tagging
yes
VLAN tagging
yes
â–² Better than 38% of models
This router supports VLAN tagging. 38.2% of routers include VLAN tagging.
QoS
yes
QoS
yes
â–² Better than 3% of models
This router includes QoS controls. 3.2% of routers include QoS controls.
Show more
N. of LAN ports
4
N. of LAN ports
4
â–² Better than 24% of models
Market range: <0 – >5
This router has 4 LAN ports, which is more than 23.7% of routers and the same as 69.2% of routers.
LAN port speeds
1 Gbps + 100 Mbps
LAN port speeds
1 Gbps + 100 Mbps
â–² Better than 87% of models
This router offers 1 Gbps + 100 Mbps on its LAN ports, which is faster than 87.2% of routers and on par with 0.3% of routers.
Mixed LAN port speeds.
N. of WAN ports
1
N. of WAN ports
1
â–¼ Worse than 9% of models
Market range: <0 – >5
This router has 1 WAN ports, which is more than 1% of routers and the same as 90.1% of routers.
N. of USB ports
1
N. of USB ports
1
â–² Better than 39% of models
Market range: <0 – >5
This router has 1 USB ports, which is more than 39.5% of routers and the same as 39.5% of routers.
Power over Ethernet (PoE)
no
Power over Ethernet (PoE)
no
Category Benchmark
This router does not support Power over Ethernet (PoE). 0.5% of routers can be powered over Ethernet.
Show more
Management interface
Web UI, App
Management interface
Web UI, App
â–² Better than 33% of models
This router uses Web UI, App for management, which is more advanced than 33.4% of routers and equal to 57% of routers.
Tether app
Firmware upgrade method
Web UI, App, Automatic
Firmware upgrade method
Web UI, App, Automatic
â–² Better than 79% of models
This router supports Web UI, App, Automatic firmware update methods, which are more convenient than 78.9% of routers and equal to 19.9% of routers.
Tether app
Traffic monitoring
yes
Traffic monitoring
yes
â–² Better than 18% of models
This router includes traffic monitoring. 18.1% of routers include traffic monitoring.
Guest Wi-Fi network
yes
Guest Wi-Fi network
yes
â–² Better than 9% of models
This router offers a guest Wi‑Fi network. 8.6% of routers offer a guest Wi‑Fi network.
Captive portal
yes
Captive portal
yes
â–² Better than 77% of models
This router offers captive portal features. 76.7% of routers offer captive portal features.
Show more
CPU clock speed
1x 0.9 GHz
CPU clock speed
1x 0.9 GHz
â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
This router runs at 1x0.9 GHz, which is slower than 55.6% of routers.
RAM capacity
128 MB
RAM capacity
128 MB
â–¼ Worse than 52% of models
Market range: <0 MB – >1k MB
This router has 128 MB of RAM, which is less than 51.6% of routers and the same as 17.1% of routers.
Internal storage
0.015625 GB
Internal storage
0.015625 GB
â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
Market range: <0 GB – >0.5 GB
This router has 0.015625 GB of internal storage, which is less than 58.6% of routers and the same as 13.8% of routers.
Hardware acceleration
yes
Hardware acceleration
yes
â–² Better than 31% of models
This router offers hardware acceleration. 31.4% of routers offer hardware acceleration.
N. of external antennas
3
N. of external antennas
3
â–² Better than 58% of models
Market range: <0 – >10
This router has 3 external antennas, which is more than 58.4% of routers and the same as 13.3% of routers.
Show more

TP-Link Archer C1200 vs the average router

246810TotalWirelessSecurityNetworkingPortsManagementHardware
  • Faster LAN ports
    LAN port speeds
    1 Gbps + 100 Mbps
    â–² Better than 87% of models
    This router has a higher LAN port speed than the average router (1 Gbps + 100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps). The average router has a LAN port speed of 1 Gbps.
    Mixed LAN port speeds.
    1 Gbps + 100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps
  • Supports captive portal
    Captive portal
    yes
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    This router supports captive portal, while the average router does not. 23.5% of routers support captive portal.
  • 11% higher user score
    User score
    8.9/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the router.
    When it matters
    When you want to know how a router performs in daily use and how reliable it is for speed, coverage, and stability according to user feedback.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    TP-Link Archer C1200
    the average router
    ★ Better than 96% of models
    TP-Link Archer C1200 has a higher user score than the average router (8.88 vs 8.000).
    8.88 vs 8
  • 51.3% more popular
    TP-Link Archer C1200 is more popular than the average router (9.89 vs 6.5).
    9.89 vs 6.54
  • 11% higher user score
    User score
    8.9/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the router.
    When it matters
    When you want to know how a router performs in daily use and how reliable it is for speed, coverage, and stability according to user feedback.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    TP-Link Archer C1200
    the average router
    ★ Better than 96% of models
    TP-Link Archer C1200 has a higher user score than the average router (8.88 vs 8.000).
    8.88 vs 8
  • 51.3% more popular
    TP-Link Archer C1200 is more popular than the average router (9.89 vs 6.5).
    9.89 vs 6.54
  • Faster LAN ports
    LAN port speeds
    1 Gbps + 100 Mbps
    â–² Better than 87% of models
    This router has a higher LAN port speed than the average router (1 Gbps + 100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps). The average router has a LAN port speed of 1 Gbps.
    Mixed LAN port speeds.
    1 Gbps + 100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps
  • Supports captive portal
    Captive portal
    yes
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    This router supports captive portal, while the average router does not. 23.5% of routers support captive portal.
  • No dynamic routing
    Dynamic routing
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 52% of models
    This router does not support dynamic routing, while the average router does. 52.3% of routers support dynamic routing.
  • No URL filtering
    URL filter
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 97% of models
    This router does not support URL filtering, while the average router does. 96.6% of routers support URL filtering.
  • Weaker Wi-Fi security
    Wi-Fi security protocols
    WPA/WPA2, WEP, 802.1X
    â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
    This router supports the Wi-Fi security protocols WPA/WPA2, WEP, 802.1X, while the average router supports WPA2, WPA, WEP, WPS.
    WPA/WPA2, WEP, 802.1X vs WPA2, WPA, WEP, WPS
  • Less capable NAS services
    Built-in NAS services
    SMB, FTP, media server
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    This router includes SMB, FTP, media server NAS services, while the average router includes SMB, FTP, time machine, NFS, web access.
    SMB, FTP, media server vs SMB, FTP, time machine, NFS, web access
  • 1 fewer spatial streams
    N. of spatial streams
    2
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    Market range: <0 – >10
    This router has fewer spatial streams than the average router (2 vs 3). The average router has 3 spatial streams.
    2 vs 3
  • 50% less RAM
    RAM capacity
    128 MB
    â–¼ Worse than 52% of models
    Market range: <0 MB – >1k MB
    This router has less RAM than the average router (128 MB vs 256 MB). The average router has 256 MB of RAM.
    128 MB vs 256 MB
  • No band steering
    Band steering
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 52% of models
    This router does not support band steering, while the average router does. 51.8% of routers support band steering.
  • 13,788 fewer NAT sessions
    NAT concurrent sessions
    1,200
    â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
    Market range: <0 – >300k
    This router has fewer concurrent NAT sessions than the average router (1,200 vs 14,988). The average router supports 14,988 concurrent NAT sessions.
    1,200 vs 14,988
  • 1 fewer spatial streams
    N. of spatial streams
    2
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    Market range: <0 – >10
    This router has fewer spatial streams than the average router (2 vs 3). The average router has 3 spatial streams.
    2 vs 3
  • No band steering
    Band steering
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 52% of models
    This router does not support band steering, while the average router does. 51.8% of routers support band steering.
  • 18.6% slower Wi-Fi speed
    Wi-Fi speed
    1,200 Mbps
    â–¼ Worse than 52% of models
    Market range: <0 Mbps – >6k Mbps
    This router has a lower Wi-Fi speed than the average router (1200 Mbps vs 1475 Mbps). The average router reaches Wi-Fi speed of 1475 Mbps.
    1,200 Mbps vs 1,475 Mbps
  • No URL filtering
    URL filter
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 97% of models
    This router does not support URL filtering, while the average router does. 96.6% of routers support URL filtering.
  • Weaker Wi-Fi security
    Wi-Fi security protocols
    WPA/WPA2, WEP, 802.1X
    â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
    This router supports the Wi-Fi security protocols WPA/WPA2, WEP, 802.1X, while the average router supports WPA2, WPA, WEP, WPS.
    WPA/WPA2, WEP, 802.1X vs WPA2, WPA, WEP, WPS
  • No dynamic routing
    Dynamic routing
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 52% of models
    This router does not support dynamic routing, while the average router does. 52.3% of routers support dynamic routing.
  • 13,788 fewer NAT sessions
    NAT concurrent sessions
    1,200
    â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
    Market range: <0 – >300k
    This router has fewer concurrent NAT sessions than the average router (1,200 vs 14,988). The average router supports 14,988 concurrent NAT sessions.
    1,200 vs 14,988
  • Less capable NAS services
    Built-in NAS services
    SMB, FTP, media server
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    This router includes SMB, FTP, media server NAS services, while the average router includes SMB, FTP, time machine, NFS, web access.
    SMB, FTP, media server vs SMB, FTP, time machine, NFS, web access
  • 50% less RAM
    RAM capacity
    128 MB
    â–¼ Worse than 52% of models
    Market range: <0 MB – >1k MB
    This router has less RAM than the average router (128 MB vs 256 MB). The average router has 256 MB of RAM.
    128 MB vs 256 MB
  • 87.5% less internal storage
    Internal storage
    0.015625 GB
    â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
    Market range: <0 GB – >0.5 GB
    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.
    0.015625 GB vs 0.125 GB
  • 70.5% heavier weight
    Weight
    750 g
    â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
    Market range: <200 g – >1.2k g
    This router is heavier than the average router (750 g vs 440 g). The average router weighs 440 g.
    750 g vs 440 g
  • 41 mm wider width
    Width
    243 mm
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    Market range: <100 mm – >300 mm
    This router is wider than the average router (243 mm vs 202 mm). The average router is 202 mm wide.
    243 mm vs 202 mm

Graphic comparison of TP-Link Archer C1200 and other routers

No results found

Third-party reviews

United Kingdom
amazon
4.2
6634 Reviews
amazon
4.3
1120 Reviews
amazon
4.4
334 Reviews
United States
Amazon_logo.png
4.2
6832 Reviews
Amazon_logo.png
4.3
1119 Reviews
Amazon_logo.png
4.4
326 Reviews

(Reviews last updated: May 2026)

What customers like about TP-Link Archer C1200?

  • Affordable price point for an entry-level gigabit router
  • Extremely easy setup and management via the TP-Link Tether mobile app
  • Good wireless coverage for small to medium-sized apartments
  • Reliable dual-band performance for basic tasks like HD streaming and web browsing
  • Includes useful features like parental controls, guest networks, and a USB port for file sharing
  • Sleek and compact design with options for wall mounting

What customers dislike about TP-Link Archer C1200?

  • Long boot-up times, often taking up to three minutes to initialize
  • Reports of occasional stability issues, including random reboots during heavy use or gaming
  • Signal strength significantly degrades when passing through multiple thick walls
  • The glossy finish of the casing acts as a magnet for fingerprints and dust
  • Stock firmware is considered basic, with some advanced users preferring third-party alternatives like OpenWRT
  • May struggle to handle a high number of simultaneous devices under heavy load

Video reviews

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

Compare TP-Link Archer C1200 with other routers

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