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

TRENDnet TEW-639GR review: 77 specs compared

Avg. price:~£80Wi-Fi version:Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n)Wi-Fi speed:300 MbpsLAN port speeds:1 GbpsMesh Wi-Fi:no

TRENDnet TEW-639GR Review: Compare 77 technical specifications and 1 expert reviews to see how this product ranks in the Routers category and whether it is worth buying.

TRENDnet TEW-639GR
6.4/10

Overall score

Score
6.4/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components

40%

5.9

Technical score

25%

5.9

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 6.9, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–¼Worse than 95% of routers
7.5

Value for money

Value for money
7.5/ 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–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components

70%

6.4

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–¼Worse than 96%
5.9

Technical score

Technical score
5.9/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

26%

4.8

Wireless

20%

5.4

Ports

18%

6.3

Networking

14%

9.4

Security

12%

5.1

Hardware

10%

5.2

Management

â–¼Worse than 91%
5.9

Reviews score

Reviews score
5.9/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models

5.9

Mark 7.5 is below the typical mark 8.1 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

8.1

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 review, with a printed score. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 96%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 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 (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • trendnet-tew-639gr
  • trendnet-tew-639gr
  • trendnet-tew-639gr
  • trendnet-tew-639gr
  • trendnet-tew-639gr
trendnet-tew-639gr
trendnet-tew-639gr
trendnet-tew-639gr
trendnet-tew-639gr
trendnet-tew-639gr
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.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of router TRENDnet TEW-639GR

Technical score
Technical score
5.9/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components:

26%

4.8

Wireless

20%

5.4

Ports

18%

6.3

Networking

14%

9.4

Security

12%

5.1

Hardware

10%

5.2

Management

5.9
Reviews score
5.9
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.5/ 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–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components:

70%

6.4

Overall score

30%

10

Price

7.5
Brand name
Trendnet
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 + 5 GHz
This router supports 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz Wi-Fi bands, which are more versatile than 24.2% of routers and equal to 65.6% 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
Wi-Fi security protocols
WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WPA, WEP
This router supports WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WPA, WEP Wi-Fi security protocols, which are more advanced than 54.5% of routers and equal to 1.8% 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
no
This router does not support IPv6. 91.4% 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
no
This router does not support inter-VLAN routing. 24.5% of routers support inter-VLAN routing.
VLAN tagging
no
This router does not support VLAN tagging. 66.6% of routers include VLAN tagging.
QoS
yes
This router includes QoS controls. 2.4% of routers include QoS controls.
Show more
N. of LAN ports
4
Market range: <0 – >5
This router has 4 LAN ports, which is more than 34.2% of routers and the same as 59.3% of routers.
LAN port speeds
1 Gbps
This router offers 1 Gbps on its LAN ports, which is faster than 25.7% of routers and on par with 56.1% 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
0
Market range: <0 – >5
This router has 0 USB ports, which is fewer than 60.1% of routers and the same as 39.9% of routers.
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
This router uses Web UI for management, which is less advanced than 78.5% of routers and equal to 21.2% of routers.
Firmware upgrade method
Web UI
This router supports Web UI firmware update methods, which are less convenient than 75.5% of routers and equal to 23.9% of routers.
Traffic monitoring
no
This router does not include traffic monitoring. 86.3% 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
0.28 GHz
This router runs at 0.28 GHz, which is slower than 98.8% of routers.
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
0.003906 GB
Market range: <0.0039 GB – >0.5 GB
This router has 0.003906 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

TRENDnet TEW-639GR vs the average router

246810TotalWirelessSecurityNetworkingPortsManagementHardware
  • Stronger Wi-Fi security
    This router supports the Wi-Fi security protocols WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WPA, WEP, while the average router supports WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WEP.
    WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WPA, WEP vs WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WEP
  • 28 mm thinner design
    This router is thinner than the average router (26 mm vs 54 mm). The average router is 54 mm thick.
    26 mm vs 54 mm
  • 25.4 mm lower height
    This router is shorter than the average router (26 mm vs 51.4 mm). The average router is 51.4 mm tall.
    26 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
  • Stronger Wi-Fi security
    This router supports the Wi-Fi security protocols WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WPA, WEP, while the average router supports WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WEP.
    WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WPA, WEP vs WPA2, WPA/WPA2, WEP
  • 28 mm thinner design
    This router is thinner than the average router (26 mm vs 54 mm). The average router is 54 mm thick.
    26 mm vs 54 mm
  • 25.4 mm lower height
    This router is shorter than the average router (26 mm vs 51.4 mm). The average router is 51.4 mm tall.
    26 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
  • Limited firmware updates
    This router supports the firmware update methods Web UI, while the average router supports Web UI, App, Automatic.
    Web UI vs Web UI, App, Automatic
  • Lower CPU clock speed
    This router has a lower CPU clock speed than the average router (0.28 GHz vs 2x1 GHz). The average router has a CPU clock speed of 2x1 GHz.
    0.28 GHz vs 2x1 GHz
  • 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)
  • No VLAN tagging
    This router does not support VLAN tagging, while the average router does. 66.5% of routers support VLAN tagging.
  • No IPv6 support
    This router does not support IPv6, while the average router does. 91.2% of routers support IPv6.
  • 23.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.9/ 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
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 96% of models

    5.9

    Mark 7.5 is below the typical mark 8.1 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    8.1

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 review, with a printed score. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.9 vs 7.7
  • 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
  • Weaker management tools
    This router uses the management interface Web UI, while the average router uses Web UI, App.
    Web UI vs Web UI, App
  • 23.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.9/ 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
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 96% of models

    5.9

    Mark 7.5 is below the typical mark 8.1 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    8.1

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 review, with a printed score. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.9 vs 7.7
  • 7.7% worse value for money
    TRENDnet TEW-639GR has worse value for money than the average router (7.5 vs 8.1).
    7.5 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)
  • 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
  • 1 fewer spatial streams
    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
    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.
  • 32 fewer connected devices
    This router supports fewer connected devices than the average router (32 vs 64). The average router supports 64 connected devices.
    32 vs 64
  • No VLAN tagging
    This router does not support VLAN tagging, while the average router does. 66.5% of routers support VLAN tagging.
  • No IPv6 support
    This router does not support IPv6, while the average router does. 91.2% of routers support IPv6.
  • 12,000 fewer NAT sessions
    This router has fewer concurrent NAT sessions than the average router (3,000 vs 15,000). The average router supports 15,000 concurrent NAT sessions.
    3,000 vs 15,000
  • 1 fewer USB ports
    This router has fewer USB ports than the average router (0 vs 1). The average router has 1 USB ports.
    0 vs 1
  • Limited firmware updates
    This router supports the firmware update methods Web UI, while the average router supports Web UI, App, Automatic.
    Web UI vs Web UI, App, Automatic
  • Weaker management tools
    This router uses the management interface Web UI, while the average router uses Web UI, App.
    Web UI vs Web UI, App
  • No traffic monitoring
    This router does not offer traffic monitoring, while the average router does. 86.1% of routers offer traffic monitoring.
  • 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
  • Lower CPU clock speed
    This router has a lower CPU clock speed than the average router (0.28 GHz vs 2x1 GHz). The average router has a CPU clock speed of 2x1 GHz.
    0.28 GHz vs 2x1 GHz
  • 96.9% 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.
    0.003906 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
  • 9 years older release date
    This router is an older model than the average router (2010 vs 2019). The average router release year is 2019.
    January 2010
    2010 vs 2019

Video reviews

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

Not graded
Shop video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.2
cnet.com
✓ explicit
25/01/2010
Lab test · Single-band router
Verdict
TRENDnet TEW-639GR is an easy-to-use Wi-Fi N router with Gigabit ports and fast throughput, but short range and no guest network hold it back.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about TRENDnet TEW-639GR

  • Affordable price with good value for a Gigabit/Wireless-N package
  • Fast throughput performance for its class, suitable for HD streaming
  • Stable and reliable performance over long-term use for many users
  • Easy-to-use and responsive web interface with clear progress indicators
  • Includes four Gigabit LAN ports for high-speed wired connections
  • Comprehensive security features including SPI firewall and WPA2 support
  • Features a physical manual wireless on/off switch and one-touch WPS

What customers don't like about TRENDnet TEW-639GR

  • Wireless range is shorter than many competing N routers
  • Lacks high-end modern features such as USB ports or guest networking
  • Single-band only; does not support 5GHz dual-band networking
  • Some users reported connection drops under heavy multi-device utilization
  • Firmware updates may be required out-of-the-box for optimal stability
  • Throughput speeds tend to degrade significantly as range increases
  • Design flaw where light weight can cause the router to be pulled by heavy cables

Verdict

The TRENDnet TEW-639GR is a legacy N300 wireless gigabit router featuring IEEE 802.11n technology with data speeds up to 300Mbps and three external 2dBi MIMO antennas to enhance coverage. It includes five Auto-MDIX Gigabit Ethernet ports (1 WAN, 4 LAN) and energy-efficient GREENwifi technology that reduces power consumption by up to 50%. Notable pros include strong throughput performance for its class, a manual wireless on/off switch for security, and a simple web-based setup interface. However, it lacks modern dual-band support (operating only on 2.4GHz), does not include USB ports for file sharing, and has been reported to have limited wireless range and occasional stability issues under heavy loads.

Compare TRENDnet TEW-639GR with other routers

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

Graphic comparison of TRENDnet TEW-639GR and other routers

No results found