On the mikrotik page in the hardware section we can make a comparison between 2 or 3 devices to find out their differences. The following link is attached https://mikrotik.com/products/compare/RB3011UiAS-RM+RB4011iGSplusRM

The MikroTik RB3011 and RB4011 are two high-performance routers from the RouterBOARD series, designed for different levels of network demand. Although they share some features, such as support for RouterOS that allows advanced configuration and management, they also have significant differences in terms of hardware, capabilities, and optimal applications. Here I detail the main differences between these two models:

MikroTik RB3011

• CPU: The RB3011 uses a 1.4 GHz dual-core ARM processor.
• Ethernet ports: It has 10 Gigabit Ethernet ports, divided into two groups and connected through an internal switch.
• Routing Performance: Suitable for routing rates up to approximately 1 Gbps with complex configurations.
• USB: Features a USB 3.0 port for additional storage or a 4G/LTE modem.
• RAM: It has 1 GB of RAM, enough for most routing and network management configurations.

MikroTik RB4011

• CPU: The RB4011 improves performance with a 1.4 GHz quad-core ARM processor.
• Ethernet ports: It also offers 10 Gigabit Ethernet ports, but with improved performance thanks to its more powerful processor.
• Routing Performance: Capable of handling a higher volume of traffic, ideal for more demanding networks. It offers better performance in intensive tasks such as routing, VPNs and firewall rules.
• USB: It does not have a USB port in most of its versions.
• RAM: It also comes with 1 GB of RAM.
• WiFi: Some variants of the RB4011 include high-power WiFi (RB4011iGS+5HacQ2HnD-IN models), offering built-in wireless capabilities not present in the RB3011.
• SFP Port: Unlike the RB3011, the RB4011 includes a 10G SFP+ port for high-speed connectivity to a fiber network, making it suitable for environments where a fast fiber connection or uplinks are needed.

Optimal Applications

• RB3011: It is a robust option for small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs), offices, or network applications where the balance between performance and price is important. Its port diversity and management capabilities make it versatile for many network configurations.
• RB4011: With its more powerful processor and support for high-speed fiber connectivity, the RB4011 is best suited for more demanding environments that require high network performance, such as larger enterprises, high-density network applications or where uplink is needed of 10 Gbps.

Both devices are powerful and flexible, with the choice between one or the other depending primarily on specific network performance needs, budget, and wireless or fiber connectivity requirements.

The table below provides a comparison between two popular models of MikroTik routers: RB3011 and RB4011. These devices are designed for different usage scenarios, with the RB4011 generally being more powerful and suitable for more demanding applications. Here are the key differences in their specifications and capabilities:

Notes on comparison:

• Performance: The RB4011 offers superior performance thanks to its more powerful 4-core CPU and the ability to connect high-speed network devices via the 10Gbps SFP+ port, which is not available on the RB3011.
• High Speed ​​Connectivity: The inclusion of an SFP+ port on the RB4011 makes it ideal for environments requiring high-speed fiber optic connections.
• Wi-Fi: Only the RB4011iGS+5HacQ2HnD-IN model includes Wi-Fi, providing built-in wireless capabilities that can be a deal-breaker for certain usage scenarios.
• PoE Out: The RB3011 supports passive PoE output on port #10, a useful feature for powering other PoE-compatible devices directly from the router, a feature that the RB4011 does not offer.
• Form Factor and Energy Consumption: The RB3011 has a larger form factor and is designed for rack mounting, while the RB4011 is more compact but with higher power consumption.

Both devices offer flexibility and power for a wide range of networking applications, but choosing between one or the other will depend on the specific performance, connectivity and budget needs of the user or organization.