Three WAN/ISPs, best Balance?

I have three ISPs and the Balance 20 throughput is 150mps, less than the total of my WANs.

Should I upgrade to a different Peplink? Which one?

Currently I have 100/5M 150/6M and 35/5M on my ISPs

I have 20-30 users, most doing Zoom as of late.

Hi. Well, to start with I’ll say that your Balance 20 is seriously undersized for your application, even if you were to enable the 3rd WAN port. So, your question is well taken.

My best recommendation would be to engage a Peplink Partner in your part of the world, many of which are identified on Peplink’s web site. But, for now, I might direct your attention to the Balance One, Balance 210 (with 3rd WAN port activated) and the 305. The 305 might be “overkill” but it would be difficult to know without more information – which would include, in part, probable needs in the future.

Really, the best recommendation would come from a Peplink Partner.

Problem is there aren’t Peplink partners for Central America, much less specifically Costa Rica.

At this point I’m starting to think of a Balance Two and to see if I can get third ISP in through the USB.

I’d like to get a gigabyte of throughput, but have considered 600 and dropping to two ISPs.

Thoughts anyone?

I don’t know if this is still the case , but on other balances the USB port does not support an ethernet interface, only cellular.

I know it’s more expensive, but the balance 305 is in another class, I would recommend it highly.
The other option would have been the B210 + license, but the throughput is max 350Mbps vs 305 with 1G.

I agree with what @Jonathan_Pitts said. I’ll also add that we have not tested the USB/ethernet arrangement for “speed,” per se, although we have a fair number of them in use. These were introduced in the “USB 2.0 days” and I strongly suspect the throughput via USB would be greatly less than for an ethernet port. We use them for lower bandwith WANs.

I’ll also add this: If you were to want to include cellular in your WAN-mix that opens up hugely greater possibilities vis-a-vis equipment.