>Does that access point do 450 megabit 802.11n simultaneous dual-band (which needs two independent radios, each with 3 antennas)? Or is it a no-name 802.11g access point, which tops at 54 megabits (the difference is greater than the numbers show, since the newer 802.11n standard has less overhead), and which can only work in the very congested 2.4GHz band, and which probably is vulnerable to the recent WPS exploit?
I would expect there to be no difference for 99.9% of people, since most don't transfer massive files around, and those who do, probably do it infrequently enough that they can go through the hassle of plugging in a wire. (I'm a fairly tech-savvy guy, and I fall into the latter category, for example.)
Also, I'd be surprised to see more than a dozen AP's in a typical suburban location, so while 2.4GHz may be congested in general, by the pigeon-hole principle, you can probably find an empty channel.
In my experience, people who buy expensive consumer routers are the same ones who buy computers with 8Gb of RAM, and use it to browse the Internet. In both cases, there will be no performance gain from the better hardware, but there would be a big performance gain from using Free Software.