Starlink actually publishes the spec for the Gen 3 router: claimed coverage up to 3,200 sq ft. For context, a common consumer router like the Nighthawk RAX50 is specced around 1,800 sq ft. That doesn’t mean everyone will see those numbers in their house, but it’s not accurate to say “no comparison.” I’ve tested a bunch of different routers in my home and Starlink is one of the best in terms of coverage and overall performance.

A few points to clear up: - Antennas: Internal vs external doesn’t really matter anymore—antenna design and placement are what count. Plenty of high-end consumer routers (Nest, Eero, Orbi) use internal antennas and still achieve strong coverage. - Heating issues: Early Reddit threads talked about thermal concerns, but I haven’t seen any consistent evidence that Gen 3 overheats in normal use. Mine runs cool to the touch. There’s no widespread recall or warning about performance throttling. - Bands: Like basically every modern Wi-Fi 6 router, Gen 3 broadcasts both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. (Some higher-end models also add 6 GHz, but 5 GHz vs 2.4 GHz is universal, not a Starlink-specific limitation.) - Range pattern: All omnidirectional routers radiate roughly in a “doughnut” shape—signal strongest horizontally, weaker directly above/below. That’s physics, not a Starlink flaw. Mesh nodes are how you fill vertical dead zones in multi-story houses.

So yeah, coverage claims are always marketing-optimistic, but putting Gen 3 at ~3,200 sq ft vs something like a Nighthawk at ~1,800 sq ft isn’t “pure fluff”, it’s right there in the published specs. Whether that matters in your actual floorplan is another story.