GL-MT300N V2 vs GL-AR300M

Can anyone tell me the difference between these two travel routers?

Specs seem identical apart from the colour and slightly lower power consumption of the Shadow.

The MT300N-V2 is based on the MediaTek MT7628NN chip, and the AR300M is based on the Qualcomm Atheros QCA9531 chip. The AR300M is faster then the MT300N-V2, if you look at the rated speed for both OpenVPN and Wireguard on the GL iNet product pages for both routers.

The Atheros QCA9531 chip is very well supported by OpenWrt, and I find it makes a very stable router. I own multiple routers based on this chipset, and it just works for me.

The firmware from GL iNet for the MT300N-V2 uses a proprietary driver, which does not support EAP. On a personal note, my one GL iNet router that uses a MT chip has cost me more time and issues then any other of my GL iNet routers, so I will never buy another router based on a MT chip.

I highly recommend the AR300M and AR300m16 routers!


Ah fabulous thanks for the in depth reply.

On amazon reviews, I read some people saying the other way round?

That they find Mango more reliable than the Shadow.

I guess it perhaps depends on the use case?

Opinions differ. I have 2 AR300Ms working as VPN servers at different remote locations. These routers run 24hr a day, 7 days a week, and have run without fail. The older of the two has been running for close to 3 years, and is running GL iNet firmware, with a bunch of my modifications to support multiple VPN servers. The newer one has been running for several months, running with the latest version of generic OpenWrt. I have gone to the opensource, community supported, generic OpenWrt firmware for some of my GL iNet routers, as GL iNet support of new firmware on older products is pathetic, and for some of my routers, it is no longer provided.

A major issue I have with the MT300M-V2 is the generic OpenWrt version of this firmware is forced to run with a sub-optimal WIFI driver, as the MT driver used by GL iNet is not publicly available, where all the drivers used in the AR series of routers are publicly available.

If you plan on keeping this device for a long time, it is nice to know that there is a second source of firmware for your router.

1 Like

(For search engines: This thread is about Mango vs. Shadow)

Can’t believe nobody ever bought both devices to run some proper benchmarks? It would certainly have earned them nerd points.

It’s impossible to predict reliably which of the two is superior, without actually testing them in practice.

What else do you need?
Both devices are totally low valued, a benchmark does not make sense.

Based on the available information, why would anyone want to buy the MediaTek/Mango for the same price?

The Shadow has faster connection speeds, EAP support, an open chipset, an optional antenna …

Is there a catch? Do people really buy inferior devices just because they prefer the mango color?

Go for it! If you are in the US, looks like you could buy both units for around $60. Also, please benchmark the GL iNet firmware vs generic OpenWrt.

Buy for $60+t and then return the loser back to Amazon within 30 days… am I really the first person with this idea?

Yellow is cute, black is boring :rofl:

Note: I go by specs so I don’t own a Mango.

You could buy both from Amazon, swap the cases, and then return the MediaTek mutant.

This advice should not be followed.

1 Like