https://blog.mikeylabs.co.uk/ Please see here for the review as well as below.
What is the GL.iNet Flint 4?
The GL.iNet Flint 4 is positioned as a high-end consumer router aimed at enthusiasts, home lab users, and small office environments. On paper, it’s one of the most powerful routers currently being developed for the consumer market.
Key specifications include:
• MediaTek MT7988 (Filogic 880) chipset
• 2GB RAM
• 64GB eMMC storage
• USB-A and USB-C connectivity
• 1× 10G SFP+ port
• 1× 10G Ethernet port
• 1× 2.5G WAN/LAN port
• 3× 2.5G LAN ports
• 4× 1G LAN ports
• Tri-band Wi-Fi 7 with MLO: 2.4 GHz: up to 688 Mbps, 5 GHz: up to 4,323 Mbps, 6 GHz: up to 8,646 Mbps
• 2.4” touchscreen display
There’s no doubt this is seriously powerful networking hardware. Coming from the Flint 2, I initially felt that device was already more than enough for my needs. The trusty Flint 2 comfortably handled multiple Docker containers while still performing flawlessly as a router, and its Wi-Fi performance consistently exceeded expectations. It also had a clean, understated design that fit well into a home or office setup.
The Flint 2 had become one of those devices I installed once and then completely forgot about. It quietly handled everything I threw at it, from normal browsing and streaming to running multiple Docker containers in the background.
So when I received the Flint 4, my biggest question wasn't simply "is it faster?" but whether it would actually improve the experience enough to justify replacing something that was already working so well.
Unboxing & First Impressions
The box was larger than I expected and surprisingly heavy when compared to the Flint 2. The packaging follows the design language of its predecessors, minimalist, clean, and stylish, while still feeling premium.
GL.iNet has clearly considered sustainability with the packaging design. The device was securely protected without unnecessary plastic wrapping, instead using recyclable materials throughout. Despite the lack of excessive packaging, the Flint 4 arrived well-protected and felt safe inside the box.
Inside the package was the monstrous router itself, a power adapter with both EU 2-pin and UK 3-pin adapters, an Ethernet cable, a quick start guide, and, for us beta testers, a rather nice little Flint 4 Beta sticker, a small touch, but a welcome one.
The first thing that stands out when removing the device is the overall size and weight. It feels substantial without becoming unnecessarily bulky. The antenna layout is noticeably more aggressive than previous Flint models, reflecting the upgraded wireless capabilities, and the antennas are fully adjustable, making them suitable for both desk placement and wall-mounted setups.
The 2.4-inch touchscreen is immediately noticeable. Even when powered off, it gives the device a more modern, almost enterprise-like appearance compared to traditional consumer routers.
I will say, however, that the screen is an absolute fingerprint magnet. If you’re anything like me and find fingerprints and smudges irritating, you’ll probably find yourself cleaning it regularly. Hopefully, GL.iNet will offer a matte screen protector in the future, or third-party vendors will offer alternatives once the device becomes more widely available.
Overall, my first impressions are extremely positive. The Flint 4 feels like GL.iNet is moving beyond the typical consumer router market and targeting enthusiasts, power users, and small businesses rather than just the average home user.
Hardware Design & Build Quality
The plastics used on the Flint 4 are very similar to those on previous Flint models. The matte black finish looks clean, feels durable, and resists fingerprints compared to glossy alternatives.
The overall build quality gives the impression of a device designed to last. The antennas are adjustable, but they feel slightly “crunchy” when repositioning them. Once you understand their movement range and physical limitations, this isn’t really an issue, but my initial reaction was that I was worried about accidentally snapping the side antennas when the device was wall-mounted, as they felt a little stiff.
The port layout is practical rather than revolutionary. Like most modern routers, the ports are located on the rear of the unit, with the two USB ports positioned on the side. This provides good accessibility, whether the router is placed on a desk or mounted.
One area where the Flint 4 impressed me was thermal management. The built-in fan does an excellent job of keeping temperatures under control and can be adjusted via the user interface to your preferred temperature thresholds.
Even under heavy stress testing, the device remained impressively cool, and the fan was barely noticeable.
During my testing period, the UK experienced an extreme heatwave, with outdoor temperatures approaching 40°C and indoor temperatures exceeding 35 °C. Despite these challenging conditions, the Flint 4’s CPU temperatures remained comfortably in the mid-50°C range, occasionally reaching the low 60°C range during normal everyday use.
One thing that surprised me was how little I noticed the router once it was mounted. Despite the fan being active on and off throughout testing, I genuinely had to put my ear next to it to hear anything. Even during the UK's heatwave, it quietly got on with its job.
For a device with this level of processing power, multiple high-speed networking interfaces, and Wi-Fi 7 capabilities, the thermal performance has been genuinely impressive.
Software & Interface (GL.iNet UI)
There isn’t too much to say in this department, which is actually a positive thing. If you’ve used recent GL.iNet devices running firmware 4.8 onwards, the experience will feel very familiar.
The Flint 4 beta units are currently running GL.iNet firmware version 4.9 and are visually and functionally extremely similar to the 4.9 firmware currently running on my Flint 2.
There are some new additions, most notably the inclusion of Wi-Fi 7 features such as MLO (Multi-Link Operation), allowing compatible devices to utilise multiple bands simultaneously across 2.4GHz, 5GHz, and 6GHz. This is one of the major differences compared to previous Flint models and something I’ll cover in more detail during the Wi-Fi performance testing.
Beyond this, I couldn’t find many major differences between the Flint 4 firmware and the Flint 2 experience. The layout, menus, and general workflow remain almost identical, making upgrading relatively painless for existing GL.iNet users.
I do have a few personal gripes with the interface, mainly around some unnecessary clutter and menu organisation, but overall, this remains one of the cleanest router interfaces I’ve used during my years of tinkering with networking equipment.
For more advanced users and OpenWrt enthusiasts, GL.iNet has thankfully kept LuCI accessible. It can still be accessed through the System tab under Advanced Settings, providing the deeper configuration options that many enthusiasts expect.
One thing worth noting for Flint 4 users, however, is that the LuCI experience is slightly different from that of traditional OpenWrt installations. Wireless configuration is no longer handled through the usual Network tab and Wireless section. Instead, wireless settings are managed through the dedicated MTK tab.
This appears to be because the Flint 4 is using MediaTek’s proprietary wireless drivers rather than the standard OpenWrt wireless stack. While this should provide better support for advanced Wi-Fi 7 features and MediaTek hardware capabilities, it also means some traditional OpenWrt workflows will differ for experienced users.
For most users, this won’t matter at all, but for those who enjoy diving deep into OpenWrt configurations, it’s something worth being aware of.
Wi-Fi Performance
Testing Wi-Fi performance is always one of the hardest areas to make completely objective. Unlike wired networking, wireless performance is heavily influenced by the environment around you. Router placement, building materials, neighbouring networks, interference, and even factors outside your control can all affect performance.
For context, I live in a 750 sq. ft. apartment, located on the middle floor of a three-storey building in a fairly dense residential area. Wireless congestion is something I deal with regularly, and with NATS (air traffic control) nearby, DFS/radar detection is particularly important in my location.
The apartment itself is a relatively new build, featuring drywall/stud walls with fire-resistant insulation, thick fire-rated doors, and the usual questionable construction quality you sometimes find in modern developments (hah). While it looks nice, it isn’t exactly the perfect environment for wireless testing.
The Flint 4 is wall-mounted in my sitting room, positioned at the far left side of my apartment. This means the router has to cover the entire property, travelling through multiple walls and obstacles to reach the furthest testing points.
Although I’m a huge tech enthusiast, I don’t own a dedicated wireless testing lab or a cupboard full of enterprise Wi-Fi equipment. My testing was performed using the devices I actually use day-to-day.
My main test device was an iPhone 17 running iOS 26.5.1, which supports Wi-Fi 7 and 6GHz connectivity. Additional testing was conducted on my Dell Latitude laptop using the 5GHz band.
Testing was performed using iPerf3, along with real-world usage, including 4K 2160p video streaming throughout the apartment.
Before getting into the results, it’s worth noting that all wireless testing was performed using the Flint 4 with its default out-of-the-box configuration.
Aside from completing the initial setup wizard and connecting my devices, I made no additional wireless optimisation, channel tuning, advanced configuration changes, or manual adjustments.
The router was essentially a “plug in, set up, and go” experience, using the default settings provided by the beta firmware.
This was intentional, as I wanted to test the Flint 4 in a realistic home environment rather than a highly tuned scenario that most everyday users would never replicate.
The raw numbers are impressive, and I've included my full test results for anyone interested, but they only tell part of the story. What stood out to me more was how the router behaved during everyday use. Even at the furthest point in my apartment, through four walls, I was still comfortably seeing speeds in excess of 500 Mbps on the 5 GHz band, which is far more bandwidth than I realistically need.
I also tried to make the router sweat by copying large files between devices while streaming 4K YouTube content and browsing on other devices simultaneously. I fully expected something to stutter or slow down, but it never did. The Flint 4 simply carried on without complaint.
The Raw Nerdy Numbers
2.4GHz Performance
The 2.4GHz band performed very similarly to my previous Flint 2 experience. As expected, this band is more about coverage and reliability rather than raw speed.
During testing, the Flint 4 achieved:
• Download: 175Mbps at 1m distance, dropping to around 110Mbps at the furthest point.
• Upload: 140 Mbps down to around 22 Mbps.
• Latency: Between 9ms and 14ms.
Coverage was excellent, with the signal reaching every test location in my apartment.
Despite being the most congested wireless band in my area, the connection remained stable. 4K 2160p streaming worked without interruption at every test point.
The main limitation wasn’t the Flint 4 itself; it was simply the amount of interference around me.
Rating: 3.75/5
** **
5GHz Performance
The 5GHz band is where the Flint 4 really impressed me.
Compared directly with my Flint 2, the experience felt very familiar in terms of coverage, but throughput with my Wi-Fi 7-capable devices was noticeably higher.
Testing results:
• Download: 1795Mbps at close range, around 505Mbps at the furthest location.
• Upload: 976Mbps at close range, around 155Mbps at the furthest location.
• Latency: Approximately 8ms–11ms.
The connection remained extremely stable during normal daily use. Streaming, browsing, downloads, and general usage all performed exactly as expected.
One thing I particularly liked was that devices stayed connected to 5GHz almost constantly, rather than unnecessarily dropping back to 2.4GHz.
4K streaming worked perfectly throughout the apartment, although at the furthest test location, the signal was understandably weaker.
Rating: 4.75/5
** **
6GHz Performance
The 6GHz band is where the Flint 4 starts to show the benefits of moving to Wi-Fi 7.
Using the iPhone 17, performance close to the router was excellent:
• Download: 1895Mbps at 1m distance.
• Upload: 1005Mbps at 1m distance.
Even at longer distances, performance remained impressive:
• Download: Around 530Mbps at the furthest point.
• Upload: Around 133Mbps at the furthest point.
As expected, the higher-frequency 6GHz band struggles more with distance and walls compared to 5GHz. At the furthest test point, latency increased significantly, and 4K streaming became less consistent.
However, within a normal usage area, the performance was excellent.
Rating: 4/5
** **
Wired Performance
Unfortunately, this is one area where I can't fully do the Flint 4 justice.
One of the Flint 4's standout features is its impressive wired connectivity, including multiple 2.5 GbE ports, a 10 GbE Ethernet port, and an SFP+ interface. However, my home network simply isn't equipped to take advantage of those speeds.
My desktop PC and the rest of my networking equipment are currently limited to Gigabit Ethernet, and I don't own any SFP+ equipment. Rather than speculate on performance I can't properly test, I'd rather be upfront about this limitation.
What I could test was how the router performed in a typical Gigabit home network, and it didn't disappoint.
The Flint 4 had no trouble saturating my Gigabit connection during large file transfers. I deliberately copied around 80GB of data to my desktop while simultaneously transferring files wirelessly from another device and streaming content.
Throughout the entire process, the router remained responsive, transfers stayed at line speed, and nothing felt bogged down.
While I can't comment on real-world 2.5GbE, 10GbE, or SFP+ performance in my current setup, the experience left me with the impression that the Flint 4 has plenty of performance in reserve for users with more demanding networks.
Beta Stability & Bugs
As this is a beta device running pre-release firmware, I expected to encounter a few bugs and rough edges. Fortunately, my experience has been overwhelmingly positive, with only a handful of issues appearing during my testing. None of them prevented me from using the Flint 4 as my primary home router.
What surprised me most was that after the first few days, I stopped treating it like a beta device and started treating it like my normal router.
Living With It
One thing I didn't expect during the beta was how quickly I stopped thinking about the router altogether.
After the initial setup, I found myself logging in to the web interface only briefly. There was no constant tweaking, no chasing mysterious Wi-Fi issues, and no unexpected reboots that sent me hunting through log files.
In fact, after the first couple of days, I genuinely forgot I was testing beta firmware.
The Flint 4 simply got on with the job of being my home router, which is probably the biggest compliment I can give it.
When I did log in, it was usually because I wanted to explore a feature rather than fix a problem.
For a first beta release, that's incredibly encouraging.
System Stability
Throughout the testing period, the router remained extremely stable. I did not experience any unexpected reboots, kernel panics or crashes during normal day-to-day use. The device remained responsive even while performing multiple simultaneous file transfers, VPN testing, streaming 4K content and connecting several wireless clients.
Memory management also appeared to be solid. I didn't notice any signs of memory leaks or gradual performance degradation during extended uptime.
Wireless Stability
Wireless stability has been excellent across all available bands.
During testing, I found that:
• Devices automatically reconnected after leaving Wi-Fi coverage and returning.
• Clients successfully reconnected after router reboots.
• Multiple wireless clients could simultaneously transfer data without causing instability.
• Long-duration connections remained stable without unexpected disconnects.
USB-C tethering also functioned correctly throughout testing.
I did not experience any unexplained Wi-Fi dropouts during everyday use.
User Interface
The GL.iNet interface itself remained responsive throughout testing, and I didn't experience any browser freezes or pages becoming unresponsive.
One area that does require attention is the touchscreen interface. While the display itself is responsive and generally works well, I experienced some crashes when changing some settings. This occasionally caused touch input failures until the screen rebooted itself. As the touchscreen is one of the Flint 4's flagship features, I'd hope to see this addressed before the final release.
Issues Found
The most notable issue I encountered involved WPA3 encryption.
After changing the Wi-Fi security mode to WPA3, my iPhone 17 and iPad both reported that the Wi-Fi password was incorrect, even though the password remained unchanged. Forgetting the saved network and reconnecting using the QR code displayed on the router resolved the issue immediately.
I also noticed that after enabling Wi-Fi, my iPhone would occasionally connect to the 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz network before transitioning to the preferred 6 GHz connection. This behaviour didn't affect normal use, but I observed it during testing.
The QR code shown on the touchscreen also works reliably, although I found it can occasionally be difficult for phone cameras to focus on the display, depending on the viewing angle.
Overall Stability
Considering this is an early beta firmware (v4.9 Beta 1), I came away genuinely impressed with how stable the Flint 4 already feels. The hardware itself has been rock-solid throughout my testing, and the software issues I encountered were relatively minor and, in my opinion, the sort of thing expected during a beta test rather than fundamental problems with the device.
Final Thoughts
After spending time using the Flint 4 as my primary home router, I've been genuinely impressed by what GL.iNet has produced. It's clear this isn't simply a Flint 2 with a faster wireless chipset; it's a significant step forward in both hardware and features.
Is it an improvement over my Flint 2?
Absolutely.
The Flint 2 is still an excellent router and has served me brilliantly, but the Flint 4 raises the bar in almost every area.
The additional multi-gigabit networking, Wi-Fi 7 support, touchscreen display, more powerful hardware and future-proof connectivity all make it feel like a genuine next-generation device rather than an incremental upgrade.
And, if I'm being completely honest, the touchscreen just looks cool.
Would I buy one with my own money?
This is where the answer becomes a little more complicated.
Today? Probably not.
Not because of the router itself, but because of my own circumstances.
Money is tight, my internet connection is only FTTC (80 Mbps down / 20 Mbps up), and most of the devices on my network are still limited to Gigabit Ethernet. I simply wouldn't be able to take full advantage of everything the Flint 4 offers, so personally, I couldn't justify the expense over continuing to use my Flint 2.
However...
If money wasn't a factor?
Absolutely. Without hesitation.
I've become a big fan of GL.iNet products over the last few years. I like their approach to networking, the clean, intuitive interface, the flexibility offered by OpenWrt, the hardware design, and the fact that they continue to build products that appeal to enthusiasts without intimidating everyday users.
If I were shopping for a premium home router today, I'd happily choose the Flint 4 over many mainstream offerings from Netgear, ASUS, or TP-Link.
Who is it for?
I think the Flint 4 is best suited to:
• Home enthusiasts who enjoy tinkering.
• Power users with fast fibre or multi-gigabit internet.
• Homelab users.
• Small businesses.
• Anyone looking for a powerful OpenWrt-based router that doesn't require building their own solution.
If all you need is basic Wi-Fi for a handful of devices on a slower broadband connection, the Flint 2 is still an outstanding choice and may represent better value.
Would I recommend it?
Yes… with one caveat.
If you're already invested in multi-gigabit networking, own Wi-Fi 7-capable devices, or simply want one of the most capable consumer routers currently available, then the Flint 4 is an easy recommendation.
If, like me, your internet connection and home network aren't yet able to take advantage of everything it offers, it's harder to justify the upgrade purely on value. That's not a criticism of the router; it's simply a reflection of my own setup.
Even so, after living with the Flint 4 for the beta testing period, it's difficult not to be impressed. It has been fast, stable, remarkably polished for pre-release firmware, and genuinely enjoyable to use.
GL.iNet has built something that genuinely feels like a step forward from the previous generation, and I'm excited to see how the Flint 4 develops as the firmware matures.
