All of them have their own quirks -- there is no "perfect" router.
I don't have direct experience with Marvell-based devices. The processor performance in them, from what I understand, is very good. There has been a great deal of improvement with the Marvell wireless drivers over the last couple years. Nobody knows how this will change after Marvell was acquired by NXP. It really could go either way.
The other two SoC series that I'd recommend looking at are the IPQ40xx and IPQ806x.
Personally, I use the EA8300s (IPQ4019), but that choice was driven by it being one of the few three-radio devices, which is an advantage for a wireless-mesh deployment (OK, and a certain forum member convincing me that it would be trivial to support). My situation prevents wiring between APs, or even reliably using power-line modems. The "normal", two-radio EA6350v3 has been running around US$75 and uses a very similar SoC (IPQ4018, basically an IPQ4019 without the PCI bus for the off-chip wireless) and seems like a good choice in that price range, at least for US-based purchasers. The IPQ40xx is "quirky" in terms of advanced VLAN setup, but can generally be managed through config files, rather than directly through the GUI.
The IPQ806x-based devices are generally a step up in processing power from the IPQ40xx. I don't have any personal experience with them. The reports that I read are that the performance is good. It's quirk seems to be that there aren't (yet) drivers for its special, network co-processors. IPQ8065 devices tend to be in the US$150-200 range. The slightly older IPQ8064-based routers seem to have been discontinued on the US market.
It comes down to budget and which of the quirks bother you the least.
A well-supported IPQ40xx router could well be repurposed into a second AP for more years of use if you decide to upgrade in a couple years or move over to something like an x86_64 router if your bandwidth requirements get close to the gigabit range. (I've still got one of my "ancient" Archer C7v2 units running as an AP.)