I do indeed have gigabit, and Air can't come close. Tell me more about the privacy issues in WireGuard... Or is this just repetition of something written on Air's website? Genuine question, as I see that a lot on various VPN sites (when they don't happen to have the support for it). WireGuard is stable as a protocol, audited and well tested. It's also well past mainline release and full kernel integration in Linux, and hasn't been considered experimental for around six Linux kernel versions now.
The 'privacy issues' basically amount to endpoint storage on the 'server' (WG doesn't actually have a 'server', it's a P2P model) and static key issues. Since the keys are public/private and you can generate your own, it's as secure as SSH. That is to say, very. Especially since it uses 256 bit keys by default and the encryption is modern, lean and has no known vulnerabilities. The endpoint issue is a 'possible' concern, if you don't wish an adversary (i.e. nation state) to know you were connected to the VPN at some point.
Any decent provider, including Mullvad, Azire and OVPN have mitigations for these potential privacy concerns. They run encrypted PXE boot on diskless servers (i.e. RAM only), with the daemons set to log to /dev/null (or disabled completely where technically possible), and they wipe the last connection/endpoint within 3 minutes of a handshake expiring. Azire go one step further, and had Jason Donenfeld (WireGuard's creator) write a 'rootkit' to lock out all access to the daemon. Even the owners can't see into the WireGuard instance, and no tools or manual checking will reveal who - if anyone - is connected to the service, let alone what they're doing. They call this 'blind operator mode'. [1]
I mentioned the 'contended' servers because many are at around 50% or more usage. Even those that aren't don't give you a lot of bandwidth to play with. Even in your own example, 800Mbps is still over 100Mbps less than I get from Mullvad/OVPN/Azire/PIA/Nord using Wireguard... and even then, good luck getting 800Mbps reliably over OpenVPN.
This is not an assault on Air. They're a nice provider, mostly, and as I said I used them for years. Their refusal to move with the times and migrate to - or at least offer contemporaneously - WireGuard was a foolhardy one imo. Even with OpenVPN v2.5 or v3, and the new wintun adapter (to replace the old, slow TAP) doesn't come close to matching WireGuard for speed or simplicity. Ironically, the (relatively large) improvements in speed brought by wintun are still thanks to WireGuard, as it was created by... Jason Donenfeld, WG's creator, to bring a faster virtual interface to Windows for WireGuard's Win userspace application.[2]
As I said, you pay your money and you make your choice. For me, when it was a choice between 200Mbps to 400Mbps up and down, on a single core, at the whim of a single gigabit server; or >900Mbps all day every day connected to a multi-gigabit server, using all cores, with a simple and tested native networking protocol (wg) it was a no brainer. Your choices can, of course, differ. Your allusion to cost is a non sequitir, as plenty of decent wg based VPNs offer similar or even cheaper pricing. I just happen to like Mullvad and OVPN.
[1]
https://www.azirevpn.com/docs/security#blind-operator-mode
[2]
https://www.wintun.net/