Amped Wireless REC4MM (2016) vs dodocool Wireless-N Wi-Fi Extender

The Amped Wireless REC4MM (2016) makes for a mediocre Wi-Fi Extender and should be avoided by the majority of people.

In the case of the dodocool Wireless-N Wi-Fi Extender, however, we were unable to find enough data to come to any meaningful conclusions.

It's very likely that you can find some considerably better alternatives on the market.

If you're still interested in reading more about the Amped Wireless REC4MM (2016), however, here's a quick summary of what we know about it:

The reviewers at PCmag have featured the Amped Wireless REC4MM (2016) in their Amped Wireless High Power AC2600 Wi-Fi Range Extender With MU-MIMO (REC44M) Review roundup. However, it fell short of making it to the top of their list.

Moving on to the dodocool Wireless-N Wi-Fi Extender: no sources that perform reliable and objective hands-on testing have included it in their Wi-Fi Extender roundups, which usually means that a product doesn't make for a good purchase.

We couldn't find any sources that tested both of these Wi-Fi Extenders, so we only analyzed how they performed in reviews from different sites.

We first examined which sources rated each of these best and found that the Amped Wireless REC4MM (2016) got its highest, 8, rating from PCmag, while the dodocool Wireless-N Wi-Fi Extender earned its best, 8, score from KnowTechie.

Lastly, we averaged out all of the reviews scores that we could find on these two products and compared them to other Wi-Fi Extenders on the market. We learned that both of them performed far better than most of their competitors - the overall review average earned by Wi-Fi Extenders being 7.1 out of 10, whereas the Amped Wireless REC4MM (2016) and dodocool Wireless-N Wi-Fi Extender managed averages of 8.0 and 8.0 points, respectively.

Due to the difference in their prices, however, it's important to keep in mind that a direct Amped Wireless REC4MM (2016) vs. dodocool Wireless-N Wi-Fi Extender comparison might not be entirely fair - some sources don't take value for money into account when assigning their scores and therefore have a tendency to rate more premium products better.