The stable release of Linux kernel 7.1 is now available, featuring a significant overhaul of the NTFS storage driver and broad hardware performance enhancements. This update includes a completely rewritten NTFS implementation that has been in development for four years to provide full write support and improved stability. Administrators managing cross-platform environments will benefit from better write performance through the integration of iomap and folio technologies.

Source

Microsoft has released Windows 11 build 29610 to the Experimental channel, targeting future hardware platforms rather than existing installations. This specific version, identified as 26H1, is designed exclusively for upcoming ARM64 devices powered by Snapdragon X processors. Standard systems running Intel or AMD hardware will not receive this update through traditional Windows Update channels.

Source

Microsoft has released a series of dynamic updates alongside the June 2026 Patch Tuesday cycle to improve system recovery and setup processes. These packages are designed to be integrated into existing Windows images before deployment to ensure a smoother installation experience. They specifically help maintain Language Packs and Features on Demand, such as VBScript, during the operating system upgrade process.

Source

Microsoft has released Windows 11 Insider Preview build 26220.8680 to the Beta channel, introducing several accessibility and performance enhancements. A new Screen tint feature allows users to apply a color overlay to reduce display intensity and eye strain during daytime use. Additionally, the Magnifier tool now supports precise zoom entry and preset increments to improve navigation for users with visual impairments.

Source

Microsoft has updated the Windows 11 installation files available through the Media Creation Tool to include the June 2026 Patch Tuesday cumulative updates. This refresh ensures that new installations utilize version 25H2 build 26200.8655 or version 24H2 build 26100.8655 immediately upon deployment. By integrating these updates into the base image, the vendor reduces the volume of post-installation downloads and minimizes the security exposure window for new systems.

Source

Microsoft has officially acknowledged that the Windows 11 File Explorer performs slower than previous versions and is developing system-level optimizations to address these issues. The primary focus of current internal testing is a significant improvement to bulk file deletion speeds. Initial benchmarks indicate that these changes could make batch deletion operations at least 30% faster for most users.

Source

Microsoft is developing a significant performance update for Windows 11 that targets file system operations. The primary focus of this optimization is the bulk deletion of files, which is expected to become at least 30% faster. These improvements address the software overhead involved in updating NTFS entries, metadata, and indexing during large-scale file tasks.

Source

Is Synology Moving Away From Routers? Synology is still best known for NAS hardware, DSM, backup software, private cloud storage, surveillance, and business data management, but its router range has always been an interesting side branch of the wider ecosystem and one that I have genuinely enjoyed reviewing. Products such as the RT2600ac, MR2200ac, WRX560 […]

Aoostar WTR Max… but with an Intel i5 Now

The Aoostar WTR Max Intel version is best understood, at least at this stage, as an early preview of a known NAS design rather than a finished retail product. The unit sent to me appears to retain the same general WTR Max concept as the earlier 2025 model, built around a compact 6-bay SATA layout plus 5 M.2 NVMe slots, while replacing the Ryzen 7 8845HS used in the current WTR Max 8845 with Intel’s Core i5-1235U. That CPU change is significant because these 2 processors target different kinds of systems: the Ryzen 7 8845HS is an 8-core, 16-thread chip with a 45W default TDP and boost speeds up to 5.1GHz, whereas the Core i5-1235U is a 10-core, 12-thread Alder Lake-U part with 2 performance cores, 8 efficiency cores, a 15W processor base power, and a launch date going back to Q1 2022. On paper, that makes the Intel version a potentially more efficiency-focused or cost-focused variation of the same platform, rather than a direct step up from the AMD model. That distinction matters, because this is not yet a product with confirmed pricing, confirmed availability, or a final release timetable, so the more useful question at this stage is not whether it definitively replaces the existing WTR Max 8845, but whether Aoostar is preparing to turn this chassis into a broader platform with multiple hardware tiers built around different CPUs and buyer priorities.

If this version works as intended, its appeal is fairly easy to understand even before full launch details are known. The original WTR Max formula already stands out because it combines high drive density, modern external connectivity, and small-footprint DIY NAS flexibility in a way that relatively few systems currently do, and an Intel alternative could broaden that appeal for buyers who prefer Intel media features, lower-power mobile silicon, or simply a lower entry point than the Ryzen-based model if Aoostar prices it accordingly. At the same time, this remains a first look at hardware provided by the brand, not a final buying recommendation. Until Aoostar confirms retail positioning, regional availability, and exact specifications for this Intel edition, it makes more sense to treat the device as an interesting platform variation with clear practical potential, rather than a confirmed replacement for the existing AMD version already listed by Aoostar at $669 in its current storefront

---

The Aoostar WTR MAX Nas is available from the following places: Aoostar WTR Max NAS $699 on Amazon – HERE Aoostar WTR Max NAS $679 on Official Site – HERE Aoostar R1 N150 2-Bay NAS $179 – HERE Aoostar R7 4-Bay NAS $419 – HERE Aoostar R7 2-Bay 5825U NAS $399 – HERE Aoostar Oculink 800W ePCIe Docking Station $169 – HERE Aoostar GEN12 Gen4 PC $374 on AliExpress – HERE

Aoostar WTR Max Intel Version – Storage

The storage layout appears to be unchanged from the earlier WTR Max 8845 design. Physically, this platform combines 6 SATA drive bays with 5 M.2 2280 NVMe slots, giving it a mixed storage approach that is more flexible than most compact DIY NAS systems in the same size class. Aoostar’s official specification for the current WTR Max 8845 lists support for up to 6 x 24TB SATA HDDs and 5 NVMe SSDs, with the M.2 allocation split across PCIe 4.0 x2 and PCIe 4.0 x1 links rather than giving every slot the same bandwidth. In practical terms, that matters less for bulk storage and more for how the system is likely to be used: large-capacity SATA bays can be assigned to primary data, backup, or archive duties, while the NVMe slots are better suited to cache, application storage, containers, VMs, or high-speed working data. For a NAS aimed at users choosing their own OS and storage strategy, that mixed topology is one of the main reasons the WTR Max platform is notable in the first place.

The Intel Core i5-1235U is also a sensible fit for this kind of storage-heavy design because, like the Ryzen 7 8845HS used in the existing AMD version, it supports up to 20 PCIe lanes and PCIe 4.0 connectivity. That does not automatically mean the Intel model will perform identically in every storage scenario, because lane routing, controller choice, and motherboard implementation still determine how those lanes are divided between SATA, NVMe, USB4, OCuLink, and networking. Even so, on an early preview basis, the key point is that Aoostar does not appear to have changed the overall storage proposition of the WTR Max by moving to Intel. The appeal here remains the same: this is a compact chassis that can hold a large amount of slower capacity storage alongside a meaningful amount of flash storage, which makes it suitable for users who want both traditional NAS volume space and a faster SSD tier in the same enclosure.

Aoostar WTR Max Intel Version – Ports and Connections

The Aoostar WTR Max platform is already unusually well equipped on connectivity, and the Intel preview unit appears to preserve that same approach. On the currently listed WTR Max 8845 model, Aoostar specifies 2 x 10GbE SFP+ ports based on the Intel X710 controller, alongside 2 x 2.5GbE LAN ports, 1 x USB4 port, 1 x OCuLink port, 2 x USB 3.2 Gen 2 ports, 1 x USB 3.2 Gen 1 port, 1 x Type C port, 1 x HDMI output, a 3.5mm audio jack, a microSD card slot, and DC input. In practical terms, that gives the system a broader mix of storage, networking, and external expansion connectivity than most compact DIY NAS solutions, especially once the dual 10GbE and OCuLink are factored in. For an early preview, that matters because the appeal of the Intel version is not just the CPU change itself, but the fact that Aoostar seems to be pairing that CPU with the same high-connectivity platform rather than trimming the I/O to create a lower-tier model.

From the CPU side, the Core i5-1235U also makes sense in a system that leans heavily on external I/O. Intel’s official specifications list support for Thunderbolt 4 and PCIe 4.0, which aligns well with the inclusion of USB4 and helps explain why this processor can still fit into a NAS design with multiple high-bandwidth ports despite being a lower-power mobile chip. By comparison, the Ryzen 7 8845HS used in the current AMD version is the stronger processor in raw core configuration and sustained power class, but the Intel option may still hold practical appeal for buyers who place more value on Intel platform familiarity, media handling, or a potentially lower-cost entry point into the same chassis.

At this stage, though, the key observation is simply that Aoostar does not appear to have repositioned the WTR Max Intel model as a cut-down connectivity variant. Based on the preview hardware and the existing WTR Max specification, this still looks like a NAS platform built around unusually broad networking and expansion options first, with the CPU choice acting as the variable element.

Aoostar WTR Max Intel Version – Internal Hardware

Internally, the previewed WTR Max Intel unit appears to follow the same motherboard and chassis logic as the existing AMD-based design, with the main change being the move to Intel’s Core i5-1235U. That processor combines 10 cores and 12 threads in a hybrid layout made up of 2 performance cores and 8 efficiency cores, supports PCIe 4.0, and provides up to 20 PCIe lanes to distribute across storage, networking, and external expansion.

*Thanks to TechnicalCity and Nanoreview for their comparisons of these two processors

It also supports up to 64GB of memory officially on Intel’s own specification pages, across 2 channels, and does not list ECC memory support. By comparison, the Ryzen 7 8845HS commonly associated with this class of WTR Max hardware is an 8-core, 16-thread processor with PCIe 4.0, 20 usable PCIe lanes, support for DDR5-5600, and a much higher maximum supported memory capacity on AMD’s specification sheet. In simple terms, the Intel version looks less like a redesign of the platform and more like a rebalancing of it, using a lower-power mobile CPU that still has enough I/O resources to support the dense hardware layout that defines the WTR Max.

That internal trade-off is likely where the Intel model will either make sense or not, depending on the intended workload. The Ryzen 7 8845HS remains the stronger chip on paper for sustained multi-threaded tasks, heavier virtualization, and broader memory headroom, while the Core i5-1235U shifts the system toward a more efficiency-oriented profile and brings Intel’s integrated graphics stack into the equation. For a NAS like this, that could matter for media-focused deployments, lighter VM use, or users who simply prefer Intel’s platform characteristics, but it also means the Intel version should not automatically be viewed as equivalent to the AMD model in raw processing terms.

It is also worth noting that Aoostar’s current public WTR Max 8845 materials refer to the retail model as using a Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS rather than the standard Ryzen 7 8845HS, which suggests the final retail naming and CPU positioning around this series may still vary depending on region or configuration. As an early preview, the most accurate conclusion is that the internal hardware remains recognisably WTR Max in structure, but the CPU choice changes the expected character of the system more than the exterior suggests.

Aoostar WTR Max Intel Version – Price, Launch Date, More?

At the time of writing, Aoostar has not publicly listed this Intel Core i5-1235U version of the WTR Max on its storefront, so price, release date, and regional availability remain unconfirmed. By contrast, the currently listed WTR Max 8845 is shown on Aoostar’s site at $669, reduced from $699, and the product naming has shifted to specifically identify that model as the WTR Max 8845 rather than simply the WTR Max. That naming detail is relevant because it suggests Aoostar may be preparing the chassis for more than 1 CPU configuration, even if the Intel variant has not yet been formally announced. The Core i5-1235U itself is not a new processor, having launched in Q1 2022 with a 15W processor base power, while the Ryzen 7 8845HS used in the 2025 WTR Max model is a newer and higher-power chip with an 8-core, 16-thread design and a 45W default TDP. Taken together, that makes the Intel preview unit look less like a replacement for the existing AMD version and more like a possible alternative tier within the same product family.

The more important question is what Aoostar intends to do with this platform next. If the company keeps the same chassis, storage layout, and broad I/O design while offering multiple CPU variants, the WTR Max could become a more flexible series rather than a single fixed model. In that context, an Intel version would make sense as a lower-cost or differently positioned option for buyers who do not need the stronger processing profile of the Ryzen 7 8845HS, or who specifically want an Intel-based media and virtualization platform. At this stage, though, that remains an informed reading of the hardware direction rather than a confirmed launch plan. Since this unit was sent as an early preview sample and Aoostar has not yet published a retail page for the Intel edition, the most accurate conclusion is that the WTR Max Intel version is promising as a product idea, but still undefined in the areas that matter most for a final purchasing decision: official pricing, shipping regions, final specification sheet, and release timing.

The Aoostar WTR MAX Nas is available from the following places: Aoostar WTR Max NAS $699 on Amazon – HERE Aoostar WTR Max NAS $679 on Official Site – HERE Aoostar R1 N150 2-Bay NAS $179 – HERE Aoostar R7 4-Bay NAS $419 – HERE Aoostar R7 2-Bay 5825U NAS $399 – HERE Aoostar Oculink 800W ePCIe Docking Station $169 – HERE Aoostar GEN12 Gen4 PC $374 on AliExpress – HERE

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below

Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?

Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you. Need Help? Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry. [contact-form-7] TRY CHAT Terms and Conditions   Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

Gl.iNet Slate 7 vs Beryl 7 Travel Router – Which Should You Buy?

At first glance, the GL.iNet Beryl 7 (GL-MT3600BE) and the GL.iNet Slate 7 (GL-BE3600) appear very closely matched. Both are compact dual band WiFi 7 travel routers, both include dual 2.5GbE ports, USB 3.0 expansion, OpenWrt based firmware, and support for VPN client and server deployment. They are designed for similar use cases such as securing public WiFi in hotels and airports, creating a private subnet for multiple personal devices, or acting as a portable gateway for temporary work setups. On paper, their wireless speed ratings are identical, and their overall feature sets overlap significantly. However, there is a clear price separation, with the Beryl 7 typically retailing at $139.99 and the Slate 7 positioned higher at $169.99. Given how similar they appear in specification tables, this comparison focuses on what justifies that difference, looking beyond headline WiFi 7 support and examining hardware platform choices, memory configuration, interface design, performance ceilings, and overall positioning within the travel router lineup.

If you are in a hurry – here is the TL;DR – the Slate 7 is $30-40 more, and for that you get a touchscreen LCD panel to allow for client-less configuration on the fly, it arrives with double the base memory (1GB, as opposed to 512MB) and a much more performance focused processor (a Qualcomm, rather than a Mediatek, which is much more widely supported and used in router applications and services). If you can spare the $30-40, get the Slate 7!

 

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 Travel Router		Gl.iNet Slate 7 Travel Router
Buy From Gl.iNet	Buy From Amazon	Buy From Gl.iNet	Buy From Amazon

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 vs Slate 7 – Wireless Connectivity

Both the GL.iNet Beryl 7 (GL-MT3600BE) and the GL.iNet Slate 7 (GL-BE3600) are dual band WiFi 7 routers operating across 2.4GHz and 5GHz, with identical rated wireless speeds of 688Mbps on 2.4GHz and 2882Mbps on 5GHz, for a combined 3600Mbps class rating. Neither device includes 6GHz support, which means both are technically WiFi 7 implementations without access to the expanded 6GHz spectrum or 320MHz channel widths. Instead, they focus on delivering WiFi 7 features such as improved OFDMA efficiency, 4K QAM, preamble puncturing, and Multi Link Operation within the existing 2 band framework.

In practical use, this means the wireless experience between the two routers is very similar when connecting modern WiFi 7 client devices. Multi Link Operation allows compatible devices to aggregate traffic across 2.4GHz and 5GHz simultaneously rather than choosing a single band. This can improve stability and reduce latency under load, particularly when multiple devices are active. However, because neither router supports 6GHz, both are limited to 160MHz channels, which caps the theoretical advantage compared to tri band WiFi 7 platforms. For most travel environments where surrounding networks are congested and spectrum is shared, the absence of 6GHz may not be the primary limiting factor.

It is also relevant that WiFi 7 client adoption is still developing, and many connected devices will continue to operate using WiFi 6 or earlier standards. In those cases, both routers fall back to backward compatible modes with similar performance characteristics. Since their radio specifications are aligned and both omit 6GHz, there is no material wireless generation advantage of one over the other. The distinction between these two models therefore lies less in raw WiFi 7 capability and more in the hardware platform and resource allocation that supports that wireless layer.

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 vs Slate 7 – Wired Connectivity

From a wired networking perspective, both the GL.iNet Beryl 7 (GL-MT3600BE) and the GL.iNet Slate 7 (GL-BE3600) are equipped with dual 2.5GbE ports. Each device includes 1 port typically designated as WAN and 1 as LAN, but both allow role reassignment within the software. This means either router can be configured to accept a multi gigabit internet uplink while simultaneously providing a 2.5G wired connection to a local client such as a workstation, NAS, or switch. In contrast to earlier travel routers limited to 1G LAN outputs, both of these models are capable of sustaining multi gigabit throughput on both ingress and egress.

In practical deployment, this gives both devices flexibility in scenarios where internet speeds exceed 1Gbps or where high speed local transfers are required. For example, a user connecting to a fiber service above 1G can feed that into the WAN port and still provide full 2.5G bandwidth to a wired LAN device. This configuration also supports load balancing or failover setups when combined with USB tethering or repeater modes. Since both routers share this dual 2.5G configuration, there is no structural limitation on either side in terms of raw Ethernet throughput.

The differences in wired behavior emerge more subtly in how the internal hardware handles sustained traffic across those ports, rather than in port specification alone. On paper, the Ethernet configuration is effectively matched between the two models. Both remove the earlier compromise seen in WiFi 6 travel routers where users had to choose between multi gigabit WAN or LAN, and both provide the same baseline flexibility for wired high speed connectivity in a compact travel format.

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 vs Slate 7 – Internal Hardware

Although their wireless ratings and Ethernet layouts are nearly identical, the internal hardware platforms of the GL.iNet Beryl 7 (GL-MT3600BE) and the GL.iNet Slate 7 (GL-BE3600) are based on different SoCs with distinct design goals. The Beryl 7 uses a MediaTek quad core processor operating at 2.0 GHz per core, paired with 512 MB of DDR4 memory and 512 MB of NAND flash. The Slate 7 instead uses the Qualcomm IPQ5018 platform, which integrates a quad-core ARM Cortex-A53 CPU running at about 1.0 GHz with additional packet processing and network subsystem features, and pairs that with 1 GB of DDR4 memory and 512 MB of NAND flash.

In real-world router workloads, CPU architecture and memory allocation each play a role. A higher clock speed like that in the Beryl 7 tends to benefit single threaded tasks such as some encryption operations and packet inspection. The Qualcomm IPQ5018’s emphasis on networking, hardware acceleration, and integrated network subsystem may offset its lower clock speed, particularly in tasks like NAT, traffic classification, or other system-level switching operations, and the doubled memory of the Slate 7 provides more space for concurrent services, queuing, and package expansions without immediate memory contention. In practice, the two platforms reflect different design priorities rather than a simple faster/ slower division.

Both devices provide a single USB 3.0 port for data expansion alongside a USB Type-C port for power input, meaning external storage, USB tethering, or a cellular dongle must share the same data port; using one function prevents the simultaneous use of the others. The Slate 7 also includes an integrated touchscreen display that provides real-time status information and direct toggling of features such as VPN or network mode, while the Beryl 7 relies solely on web and mobile app based controls. Internally, the distinction therefore is not just MediaTek versus Qualcomm, but a trade-off between frequency-focused CPU design, expanded system memory, and user interface enhancements.

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 vs Slate 7 – Deployment

When translating specifications into practical deployment behavior, the most measurable difference between the GL.iNet Beryl 7 (GL-MT3600BE) and the GL.iNet Slate 7 (GL-BE3600) appears in VPN throughput. The Beryl 7 is rated at up to 1100Mbps with WireGuard and up to 1000Mbps with OpenVPN DCO in client mode. The Slate 7, powered by the Qualcomm IPQ5018 platform, is rated at up to 490Mbps with WireGuard and up to 385Mbps with OpenVPN DCO. Although the Qualcomm platform is well optimized for routing and packet handling, the higher clock speed MediaTek processor in the Beryl 7 provides substantially more headroom for encrypted throughput. In scenarios where the internet connection exceeds 500Mbps and VPN encryption is permanently enabled, the Beryl 7 is less likely to become the limiting factor.

In raw LAN and WiFi performance, both devices operate within a similar ceiling due to identical wireless radios and dual 2.5GbE ports. Real world file transfers over 2.5GbE typically settle below theoretical maximums, often in the 230MB/s to 240MB/s range depending on workload and protocol overhead. Neither device consistently saturates the full 2.5GbE line rate under mixed routing and wireless conditions, which reflects internal processing overhead rather than port limitation. From a pure switching and routing standpoint without heavy encryption, both platforms are capable of sustaining high multi gigabit traffic within expected travel router boundaries.

Both units are rated to support up to 120 concurrent devices, which exceeds typical travel usage but provides insight into scheduler and resource allocation capacity. The Slate 7’s 1GB memory pool may provide additional stability when multiple OpenWrt services, monitoring tools, DNS filtering, and USB storage sharing are active simultaneously. The Beryl 7, meanwhile, demonstrates a clear advantage when encrypted traffic volume is high relative to available WAN bandwidth. As a result, the performance distinction depends less on wireless speed and more on whether the primary workload is VPN intensive broadband use or service heavy multi feature deployment.

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 vs Slate 7 – Which One Should You Buy?

The GL.iNet Beryl 7 (GL-MT3600BE) and the GL.iNet Slate 7 (GL-BE3600) are closer in capability than their price difference might initially suggest. Both deliver dual band WiFi 7 across 2.4GHz and 5GHz, both provide dual 2.5GbE ports, both support OpenWrt with extensive plugin flexibility, and both are designed for securing public internet connections while travelling.

From a purely wireless and Ethernet standpoint, they are effectively matched. The practical separation appears in internal resource allocation and user interface design. The Beryl 7, priced at $139.99, offers significantly higher rated VPN throughput and a faster clocked processor, making it better suited to users with high speed broadband connections who intend to run persistent encrypted tunnels. The Slate 7, priced at $169.99, provides double the system memory and integrates a touchscreen interface that allows direct device control without relying entirely on a browser or mobile app.

The decision therefore depends on workload priorities rather than headline WiFi generation. If the primary requirement is maximizing encrypted throughput over fast WAN connections, the Beryl 7 presents stronger performance value at a lower price. If the focus is on memory headroom for multiple services, a more integrated on device interface, and a Qualcomm based networking platform, the Slate 7 may justify its higher cost. Neither device includes 6GHz support, meaning both are dual band WiFi 7 implementations rather than full tri band models.

For users specifically seeking 6GHz spectrum and 320MHz channel capability, a different tier of hardware would be required. Within the compact dual band travel router segment, the distinction between these two models is defined less by WiFi 7 itself and more by how each device balances CPU performance, memory allocation, and interface design within a portable form factor.

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 Travel Router		Gl.iNet Slate 7 Travel Router
Buy From Gl.iNet	Buy From Amazon	Buy From Gl.iNet	Buy From Amazon
PROs	CONs	PROs	CONs
+ Cheaper + Smaller & Lighter + Lower Power Consumption	– Less RAM – Lesser CPU	+ LCD Control Screen + Better Hardware Inside + Better Build Quality	– More Expensive – Larger – Slate Pro Model Coming Soon

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below

Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?

Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you. Need Help? Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry. [contact-form-7] TRY CHAT Terms and Conditions   Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 vs Beryl AX Travel Router – Which Should You Buy?

The GL.iNet Beryl AX (GL-MT3000) and the GL.iNet Beryl 7 (GL-MT3600BE) are two compact travel routers from the same product line, aimed at users who need portable, secure network access for travel, remote work, or temporary deployments. They share a similar physical footprint, OpenWrt based software environment, USB powered design, and the ability to convert a single wired or wireless uplink into a private network for multiple client devices. The comparison between them is relevant because the price difference is relatively modest, yet they are based on different wireless generations and hardware platforms. As a result, prospective buyers and existing Beryl AX users may reasonably question whether the newer Beryl 7 represents a meaningful upgrade, or whether the earlier model remains sufficient for most travel focused networking requirements.

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 Travel Router		Gl.iNet Beryl AX Travel Router
Buy From Gl.iNet	Buy From Amazon	Buy From Gl.iNet	Buy From Amazon

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 vs Beryl AX – WiFi 6 vs WiFi 7 (Do You Need It?)

The GL.iNet Beryl AX (GL-MT3000) is based on the WiFi 6 standard, supporting dual band operation across 2.4GHz and 5GHz with a combined theoretical maximum of 3000Mbps, rated at 574Mbps on 2.4GHz and 2402Mbps on 5GHz. The GL.iNet Beryl 7 (GL-MT3600BE) moves to WiFi 7 and increases the combined theoretical bandwidth to 3600Mbps, rated at 688Mbps on 2.4GHz and 2882Mbps on 5GHz. Both devices operate on 2 bands only, as the Beryl 7 does not include 6GHz support, meaning it does not use the additional spectrum sometimes associated with WiFi 7 implementations.

The practical distinction between WiFi 6 and WiFi 7 in this comparison lies less in raw peak numbers and more in protocol efficiency and connection handling. WiFi 7 introduces Multi Link Operation, allowing compatible client devices to connect across multiple bands simultaneously rather than selecting a single band. In supported environments, this can improve throughput consistency and reduce latency under load. However, the benefit depends on the presence of WiFi 7 capable client hardware. Devices limited to WiFi 6 or earlier will connect using backward compatible standards, reducing the generational advantage to incremental improvements in signal handling and overhead efficiency.

In real world travel scenarios such as hotel rooms, shared apartments, or temporary office spaces, both routers provide sufficient bandwidth for streaming, browsing, cloud access, and moderate file transfers across multiple devices.

The Beryl 7 offers higher theoretical wireless ceilings and additional aggregation capability for compatible hardware, while the Beryl AX provides established WiFi 6 performance that remains adequate for most sub 2.5Gb internet connections. The decision between them in wireless terms is therefore primarily influenced by client device compatibility and the value placed on higher theoretical throughput within a portable deployment context.

It is also worth noting that 6GHz WiFi support, while often associated with WiFi 7, currently has more limited regulatory and client adoption in parts of Europe compared to other regions. Even if a travel router in this class were to include 6GHz radios, many users in European markets would not consistently benefit from the wider 320MHz channels or expanded spectrum due to regional availability constraints and lower client device penetration. In practical terms, this reduces the immediate advantage of tri band WiFi 7 for a large portion of the target audience. Integrating 6GHz capability would also require more advanced RF design, revised antenna layout, higher power handling, and often a different class of processor platform, frequently moving toward higher tier Qualcomm solutions. That shift would increase component cost, thermal requirements, and overall retail pricing, placing the device in a materially different market segment than the current dual band Beryl models.

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 vs Beryl AX – Wired Connectivity for WAN and LAN?

Both the GL.iNet Beryl AX (GL-MT3000) and the GL.iNet Beryl 7 (GL-MT3600BE) include 2 Ethernet ports that can be configured as WAN or LAN depending on deployment needs. The structural difference lies in port speed allocation. The Beryl AX provides 1 x 2.5G port and 1 x 1G port, while the Beryl 7 provides 2 x 2.5G ports. This distinction directly affects how multi-gigabit internet connections and high speed wired clients can be distributed within the local network.

On the Beryl AX, users must decide whether the 2.5G interface will function as WAN or LAN if both upstream and downstream multi gigabit throughput is required. If the 2.5G port is assigned to WAN for an internet connection above 1G, the remaining LAN port is limited to 1G for wired clients such as a NAS or workstation. In contrast, the Beryl 7 allows a multi gigabit WAN input and a separate 2.5G LAN output simultaneously. This removes the need to prioritize one side of the connection when operating in environments with faster than gigabit internet access.

In lower bandwidth scenarios, such as hotel or public WiFi uplinks that rarely exceed 1G, the practical difference may be minimal. However, in deployments involving fiber connections above 1G, local high speed storage, or internal data transfers over wired connections, the dual 2.5G configuration of the Beryl 7 provides greater flexibility. The distinction is therefore less about port quantity and more about simultaneous throughput capability when handling multi gigabit traffic on both WAN and LAN interfaces.

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 vs Beryl AX – Internal Hardware (and what difference it makes?)

The GL.iNet Beryl AX (GL-MT3000) uses the MediaTek MT7981B dual core processor running at 1.3GHz per core, whereas the GL.iNet Beryl 7 (GL-MT3600BE) moves to a MediaTek quad core processor running at 2.0GHz per core. This is not simply an incremental clock speed increase, but a combination of higher per core frequency and a doubling of available cores. In practical routing workloads, additional cores allow parallel handling of encryption, NAT, firewall inspection, QoS rules, and multiple concurrent sessions. The higher clock speed per core also improves single threaded tasks such as certain VPN operations and packet inspection routines. As network traffic increases, particularly when VPN encryption is enabled, the scaling advantage of 4 cores at 2.0GHz becomes more relevant than raw wireless bandwidth alone.

Both devices include 512MB DDR4 memory, so runtime capacity for active services and simultaneous connections is comparable at a base level. The difference lies in onboard NAND flash storage. The Beryl AX provides 256MB of flash, while the Beryl 7 includes 512MB. For basic firmware and light package installation, 256MB is typically sufficient. However, users deploying additional OpenWrt packages, extended logging, container based services, or more complex VPN and DNS filtering configurations may benefit from the additional internal storage headroom on the Beryl 7. The larger flash capacity reduces the need to offload configuration or expand storage through external means.

Both routers feature a single USB 3.0 port for data connectivity, while the separate USB Type C port is dedicated to power input. This means there is only 1 usable USB interface for peripherals. External storage devices such as USB flash drives or portable SSDs can be connected for file sharing via Samba or WebDAV, effectively turning the router into a lightweight network storage node. However, using the USB port for storage prevents simultaneous use for USB tethering or a USB cellular dongle. In travel deployments where USB tethering to a smartphone or 4G or 5G modem is required, the port cannot be shared. As a result, internal flash capacity and USB role allocation may influence configuration decisions depending on whether the router is being used primarily for storage sharing, mobile broadband input, or wired WAN operation.

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 vs Beryl AX – Performance and Deployment Scale Long term

The hardware and wireless differences between the GL.iNet Beryl AX (GL-MT3000) and the GL.iNet Beryl 7 (GL-MT3600BE) translate into measurable differences in VPN throughput and concurrent device handling. The Beryl AX is rated for up to 300Mbps via WireGuard and up to 150Mbps via OpenVPN in client mode. The Beryl 7 increases those ceilings to 1100Mbps via WireGuard and 1000Mbps via OpenVPN DCO. These figures are dependent on network conditions and configuration, but the scaling difference reflects the impact of the stronger quad core 2.0GHz processor on encryption and packet processing workloads.

Client device capacity is also higher on the Beryl 7. The Beryl AX is positioned to support 70 plus connected devices, while the Beryl 7 is rated for 120 plus. In most travel scenarios, such as hotel rooms or short term rentals, both limits exceed realistic usage. However, in small office, lab, classroom, or event environments where a travel router may be used as a temporary gateway, the higher client handling ceiling provides additional headroom. The increase is less about encouraging high density deployments and more about ensuring stability when multiple devices are actively transferring data simultaneously.

Deployment flexibility also differs when combining wired, wireless, and VPN loads. On the Beryl AX, performance limitations are more likely to appear when multi gigabit WAN input, active VPN encryption, and numerous client sessions are all enabled concurrently. The Beryl 7, with dual 2.5G ports, higher wireless ceilings, and stronger CPU resources, is designed to sustain heavier mixed workloads before reaching saturation. In low bandwidth environments such as standard hotel WiFi, both units operate comfortably within their limits. The divergence becomes more apparent in high speed fiber connections, homelab testing, or sustained VPN dependent remote work scenarios.

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 vs Beryl AX – Which One Should You Buy?

The GL.iNet Beryl AX (GL-MT3000) and the GL.iNet Beryl 7 (GL-MT3600BE) occupy the same physical category and share a similar deployment philosophy, but they differ meaningfully in processing capability, wired configuration flexibility, wireless ceiling, and VPN throughput. The Beryl AX remains a WiFi 6 based travel router with 2.5G WAN support, stable OpenWrt integration, and sufficient CPU resources for encrypted traffic at moderate broadband speeds. For users operating within sub gigabit internet connections, running standard VPN client configurations, and connecting a typical number of personal devices, its limitations are unlikely to surface in normal travel use. It continues to provide a compact, USB powered solution for converting public or shared internet access into a private subnet.

The Beryl 7 expands on that foundation with WiFi 7 protocol support across 2.4GHz and 5GHz, Multi Link Operation, dual 2.5G Ethernet ports, higher VPN throughput ceilings, a stronger quad core 2.0GHz processor, and increased onboard flash storage. These upgrades primarily increase performance headroom rather than altering the use case itself. In environments involving faster than 1G internet connections, sustained encrypted traffic, heavier concurrent client activity, or mixed wired and wireless high throughput workloads, the Beryl 7 is less likely to encounter processing or port bottlenecks. The higher rated VPN performance, particularly with WireGuard and OpenVPN DCO, may also be relevant for remote workers whose encrypted tunnel speed is constrained by router hardware rather than the upstream connection.

It is also relevant that the Beryl 7 does not include 6GHz spectrum support, meaning it does not implement the full 3 band WiFi 7 feature set. Within the broader portfolio of GL.iNet, development is ongoing toward a 6GHz capable WiFi 7 travel platform, referenced as the Slate 7 Pro, which is expected no earlier than Q2 2026. As such, the Beryl 7 represents an incremental step forward within dual band travel routers rather than the final stage of WiFi 7 implementation in this segment. Buyers prioritizing immediate WiFi 7 support with stronger processing and dual 2.5G ports may find the Beryl 7 aligned with their requirements, while those satisfied with WiFi 6 performance and lower VPN ceilings may find the Beryl AX remains proportionate to its price and intended scope.

Gl.iNet Beryl 7 Travel Router		Gl.iNet Beryl AX Travel Router
Buy From Gl.iNet	Buy From Amazon	Buy From Gl.iNet	Buy From Amazon
PROs	CONs	PROs	CONs
+ WiFi 7 and MLO + Dual 2.5G WAN/LAN + Better CPU + More Storage	– More Expensive – Lack of 6Ghz – Same RAM/Memory	+ Cheaper + Lower Power Use + Same RAM/Memory + Same Software & Features	– Lacks MLO – Less Base Storage – Lower USB PD Support

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below

Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?

Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you. Need Help? Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry. [contact-form-7] TRY CHAT Terms and Conditions   Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

While using a computer, having an eye on your performance is essential. Being conscious of your performance potentially helps you avoid problems connected with overload. So, in this guide, we will explore how to show the Windows 11 Performance Overlay.

What is Windows 11 Performance Overlay?

Windows 11 Performance Overlay is a tool built into the computer for real-time system performance monitoring. This utility shows different metrics essential in understanding how your computer handles a range of tasks.

Some common metrics to find in Performance Overlay include the following:

• CPU use
• GPU use
• RAM use
• Network use

There are many advantages to viewing or using the Performance Overlay. However, at the top of the list is that you get enough information to help you troubleshoot issues that result in lags or crashes on your computer.

Because overlay is often transparent, it does not obstruct your workflow or gameplay.

How Do I Show the Windows 11 Performance Overlay?

1. Show the Performance Overlay Using the Game Bar

Xbox Game Bar is built into Windows 10 and 11. It is essentially a customizable gaming overlay. This utility gives access to essential functionalities without you leaving the game. You may show this performance overlay by following the steps below.

1. Press Windows + G to open the Game bar.

2. Click the Performance tab to open performance options.

3. Select your Performance options menu.

4. Tick the checkboxes for any information you want to display.

5. Return to the Performance window and click the Pin icon.

6. Latsly, press the Windows + G keys to hide your Game Bar.

2. Enable Windows 11 Performance Overlay Via the Settings App

On Windows 11, the Settings app allows you to tweak app and operating system functions. You may access the Windows Overlay option for your game bar from Settings.

1. Press Windows + I to open the Settings app.

2. On the left pane, click Gaming; on the right, click Game Bar.

3. Toggle the switch to Allow your controller to open Game Bar.

4. Now, you can use a gaming controller to open the game bar and configure Performance Overlay, as shown in the first solution.

2. Show the Windows 11 Performance Overlay Using the Task Manager

All your performance data is shown in the Task Manager. This utility also has an Always on top feature that permanently displays your performance on the screen.

1. Press the Ctrl + Shift + Esc keys to open the Task Manager.

2. Click Settings at the bottom left, then under the Windows Management category, tick Always on top.

3. Click the Performance tab, then double-click CPU for a summary view of your performance.

Where Can I Find the Windows 11 Performance Tab?

Your performance is displayed at all times in the Task Manager. Simply launch it by pressing Ctrl + Shift + Esc, then click on the Performance tab on the left pane.

Viewing Windows 11 Performance Overlay

If you have read through this guide, you should now be able to view your performance on the operating system easily. Showing performance is one of the better settings for gaming on Windows 11.

Do you have further questions on Performance Overlay? Let us know in the comment section below.

FAQs

The post How to Show Windows 11 Performance Overlay appeared first on Next of Windows.