Hp 1800-24g

N

Nacho

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 23, 2005
Messages
474
Although there is many people suggesting this switch.. I cant find anything about whether its real world performance is near wirespeed. Anyone happen to know whether it is, or a review/test of it.

In case you wonder why, needing a few new switches for lans, and wanting near wirespeed performance.
 
A search for "Hp 1800-24g wirespeed" on google (without the quotes) turns up quite a few articles mentioning wire-speed performance but I can't seem to find any readily available benchmark data to confirm or deny that.

Some promising links:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1032198118
http://www.jonorossi.com/blog/archive/2008/02/17/hp-procurve-1800-24g-gigabit-network-switch.aspx
http://akamai.infoworld.com/HP_ProCurve_1800_Series_1800-24G/product_84598.html?view=1&curNodeId=0
http://www.vnunet.com/personal-computer-world/hardware/2168150/review-hp-procurve-switch-1800

And a nice price... http://www.provantage.com/hp-compaq-j9028b-aba~7HEWN1CF.htm
 
Thanks for the finds... Most of what I see is just the mention of wirespeed, though the switch isnt high enough class to have real benchmark data out for it.
 
That was my issue too. Everyone likes to recommend the HP, but nobody has any data to back it up. Just for the record, without being given a good reason to go HP I decided not to spend the premium just to get the HP name. I got a Netgear (second choice for me was the Dell).
 
mindstormsguy said:
Everyone likes to recommend the HP, but nobody has any data to back it up.
Click to expand...
Yet there's a difference between recommending something blindly based upon a brand name and recommending it based upon either personal or collective experience. There are alot of people on this forum, particularly in this section, that work with networking as either their primary job or as a function of it. Given that, they've used items day-in and day-out, and even though they might not have any benchmark data to prove it, they know that item X is better or faster than item Y.

Just my two cents.
 
Orinthical said:
Yet there's a difference between recommending something blindly based upon a brand name and recommending it based upon either personal or collective experience. There are alot of people on this forum, particularly in this section, that work with networking as either their primary job or as a function of it. Given that, they've used items day-in and day-out, and even though they might not have any benchmark data to prove it, they know that item X is better or faster than item Y.

Just my two cents.
Click to expand...

Not that I would disagree with such a testimonial, not one person who replied in my thread actually said they used the 1800 series. Just sayin'
 
mindstormsguy said:
Not that I would disagree with such a testimonial, not one person who replied in my thread actually said they used the 1800 series.
Click to expand...

Quite a few of them. Not a problem with one yet. ;)

Never saw benchmarks of business grade switches....I believe fabric speed is fabric speed..what they claim (the business grade models) is what you get.
 
I'll be the first for you then. I run an 1800-24G at home, and I'd tell you to buy it. When I had my SAN setup as an 8-disk RAID0, I could write to it at around 103MB/s from a 2-disk RAID0 using Raptor150's.

edit: installing Vista SP1 on my other Vista box. Once that's done, I'll move a 13.1GB file across and give you a real world test.
 
All done. This is from a single Maxtor 500GB 7200RPM drive to a single Maxtor 500GB 7200RPM drive. This isn't using Jumbo Frames.


228 seconds @ 58.83MB/sec

usagehd1.jpg



Between the exact same type disks in the same box, it takes 224 seconds @ 59.88MB/sec. I'm sure if I repeated over and over again, they'd even out. So, even at 60MB/sec, it's the disks and not the switch. I'd iperf for you, but I did it quite a long time ago and got between 980Mbps - 995Mbps.


Nacho, you'll like the switch. mindstormsguy, if you like the switch you have, and the price was right for you, enjoy it. But the 1800-24G is still a better swtich.
 
LOL, sorry. I had a cold for about 3 weeks and didn't get much [H] time in. In the end, if what you have works well for what you need it to, it was a good buy.

But, this is the [H] forum, and some of us will tell you to buy something a little more than what you need sometimes. Do you need an 1800-24G for home use? Probably not. Do I? I do, but my needs are different than yours.

Now, do I need a Cisco 3750G for home use? Nope, but it'll be my next switch, just becuase it's [H]. Just need to come up with the $8K for it. Anybody want to buy my barely used left Kidney?
 
Well now that you say that; just out of curiosity, what needs do you have that the HP can deliver that the Netgear can not? Obviously, one could argue quality. Or if one had lots of HP equipment already, it may be nice to have everything the same. But other that that, I don't really see any difference in the specifications. The only difference I could find is that the Netgear has SNMP.

I wouldn't mind a Cisco either...and we've got so many sitting unused at work :(

2003080920zr1.jpg
 
mindstormsguy said:
That's good to know. I suppose they just assume that you would expect SNMP on their switches.
Click to expand...
I've yet to come across a business grade switch that doesn't support SNMP. But, maybe they're out there.
 
Gott said:
"Value gigabit switch..." Maybe that's why I haven't seen any. :D
Click to expand...

Well yeah, I'm lookin' at web managed switches (like the 1800-24). Those are all in the same class. I guess the HP and the Netgear are just better than some others. (although I've got to say I'm a little disappointed that Linksys dropped the ball there)
 
I use HP 1800 series switches at home (I have 2 8 port and 1 24 port) and the 2600 series at work. I recommend the 1800 series to everyone who will actually need to use the features or truly need the reliability.

One of the reasons I like HP so much is their support. I had a couple really old HP switches break at work and they overnight a replacement to me, almost no questions asked. I can tell you that even if that 1800-24g breaks in 5 or 10 years, HP will be there to replace it and probably within 24 hours.
 
Seems the 1800-24g will suit my needs just fine, I highly doubt that at a lan (this would be a userswitch) that traffic will go anywhere near wirespeed on every port anyway.

I personally do not use 1800-24g currently, using a 3com 2924-sfp, does the job but my twice monthly lan I provide equipment for, outgrew it.
 
mindstormsguy said:
Well now that you say that; just out of curiosity, what needs do you have that the HP can deliver that the Netgear can not? Obviously, one could argue quality. Or if one had lots of HP equipment already, it may be nice to have everything the same. But other that that, I don't really see any difference in the specifications. The only difference I could find is that the Netgear has SNMP.

I wouldn't mind a Cisco either...and we've got so many sitting unused at work :(
Click to expand...

Well, the 1800-24G has a few things over the Netgear you ordered. The Netgear has a fan where the HP doesn't. The HP uses a little less power because of that. But, since I'm using it for my SAN, the latency is lower. The Netgear spec page says it is less than 20 μs where the HP is less than 3.0 μs. Also, the HP has a 512KB buffer per a port and the Netgear has a 256KB. Options are about the same though. SNMP, trunking, VLAN's, web based management, Jumbo Frames, Flow Control, port mirroring, STP, and both have the 2 dual-personality SFP/GigE ports.

But, after seeing that picture, I'd be asking to borrow a switch. Shouldn't you have one at home to test with? I just had one at home that I was setting up for work. We're using them to connect Gig links between a bunch of sites.
 
LittleMe said:
But, after seeing that picture, I'd be asking to borrow a switch. Shouldn't you have one at home to test with? I just had one at home that I was setting up for work. We're using them to connect Gig links between a bunch of sites.
Click to expand...

That would be nice. And quite honestly, if one went missing they would never know...but I suppose that's not the point. I work for Shell, and the the Shell network is very standardized across every single location. The configuration that we actually do at our end is extremely limited, so the testing excuse probably wouldn't fly :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top