can someone explain cisco small business switch vs a cheap switch?

UnrealCpu

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 20, 2003
Messages
2,735
So i have this switch called cisco small business sg100d-05 v2 which is a 5 port very hefty well built , vs this 8 port trendnet , plastic case , both 1 gigibit. Can someone explain why the cisco could or would be better performing than a cheap 20-30 dollar plastic box switch from newegg?

I see no performance difference or maybe my eye is catching the real picture
 

UnrealCpu

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 20, 2003
Messages
2,735

schizrade

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
4,804
Those are both great desktop switches for a buck lol.

Most of it is price inflation from the Cisco name, but they are also very reliable. The Specs on a TrendNet 5 port are listed as the same, but you would have to do a side by side to see if that's actually true. Both are unmanaged so they just move packets and nothing else. It would be actually pretty interesting to so a side by side. My bet is they perform the same.

https://www.trendnet.com/products/product-detail?prod=595_TEG-S5g

I can say that the Cisco label carries weight and the saying "Nobody ever got fired for buying Cisco" is true. Its expensive but its reliable and well supported. I am moving my work network to Juniper for cost and performance reasons. An EX4300 outperforms a Cat3850 and costs significantly less.
 

Nicklebon

Gawd
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
624
First you need to define better. They likely both offer the same layer 2 switching speed or close enough so that it will matter little. Only very shitty or very old layer 2 switch architectures are blocking these days. The difference would be in the feature set. You either need a feature or you don't. If you need a feature available on the Cisco and not available on the Trendnet then your question is answered. If you don't need a particular feature then it has zero value. Solve your own value equation.
 

schizrade

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
4,804
First you need to define better. They likely both offer the same layer 2 switching speed or close enough so that will matter little. Only very shitty or very old layer 2 switch architectures are blocking these days. The difference would be in the feature set. You either need a feature or you don't. If you need a feature available on the Cisco and not available on the Trendnet then your question is answered. If you don't need a particular feature then it has zero value. Solve your own value equation.
They are all unmanaged, there are no features.
 

Nicklebon

Gawd
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
624
They are all unmanaged, there are no features.
LMAO! I would suggest that you broaden your definition of feature.

There can be certainly be features on unmanaged switches. I use a one particular unmanaged switch, from trendnet in fact, just because it does not support a particular feature.
 

schizrade

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
4,804
LMAO! I would suggest that you broaden your definition of feature.

There can be certainly be features on unmanaged switches. I use a one particular unmanaged switch, from trendnet in fact, just because it does not support a particular feature.
Yeah I guess we have different definitions of what a feature is.

Either way OP, they both do the same thing, the branding is where most of the cost is there.
 

FNtastic

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 6, 2013
Messages
1,419
Quality is the main factor. Business critical connections shouldn't be put on the cheap one. Some might do so and never experience issues. Others might do so and experience issues. That's the gamble you take. Ostensibly, anybody should be able to install the Cisco and never experience an issue. If the cheap one works for you, it works for you.

I run TP-Link at home. Would I recommend it to a business client, or at a job site? Nope
 

UnrealCpu

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 20, 2003
Messages
2,735
Those are both great desktop switches for a buck lol.

Most of it is price inflation from the Cisco name, but they are also very reliable. The Specs on a TrendNet 5 port are listed as the same, but you would have to do a side by side to see if that's actually true. Both are unmanaged so they just move packets and nothing else. It would be actually pretty interesting to so a side by side. My bet is they perform the same.

https://www.trendnet.com/products/product-detail?prod=595_TEG-S5g

I can say that the Cisco label carries weight and the saying "Nobody ever got fired for buying Cisco" is true. Its expensive but its reliable and well supported. I am moving my work network to Juniper for cost and performance reasons. An EX4300 outperforms a Cat3850 and costs significantly less.

thanks for the info. You are alittle over my head when it comes to what you described with your network but appreciate your expert opinion. Yeah i got the switches in a goodwill outlet bin and probably paid less than 1.00 for ea. But i was weary that since they are pretty old they would use alot of electricity or not be up to par with a 20.00 , 8port switch. The case is hefty and i can see where the money was put into the product. The 5 port switch for some reason feel more snappier but could be my imagination.
 

schizrade

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
4,804
thanks for the info. You are alittle over my head when it comes to what you described with your network but appreciate your expert opinion. Yeah i got the switches in a goodwill outlet bin and probably paid less than 1.00 for ea. But i was weary that since they are pretty old they would use alot of electricity or not be up to par with a 20.00 , 8port switch. The case is hefty and i can see where the money was put into the product. The 5 port switch for some reason feel more snappier but could be my imagination.
All good. They will last forever. Cisco switches get replaced not cause they die, but because the world marches on without them and they are no longer relevant. The post zombie apocalypse will be build with old catalyst switches lol.

That 5 port may actually be snappier, as they both used a shared fabric, and loaded up the 5 port has less to do on the same fabric. My guess is that 8 porter is the same board as the 5 porter with 3 more ports strapped on.
 

UnrealCpu

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 20, 2003
Messages
2,735
All good. They will last forever. Cisco switches get replaced not cause they die, but because the world marches on without them and they are no longer relevant. The post zombie apocalypse will be build with old catalyst switches lol.

That 5 port may actually be snappier, as they both used a shared fabric, and loaded up the 5 port has less to do on the same fabric. My guess is that 8 porter is the same board as the 5 porter with 3 more ports strapped on.
interesting , thanks for the info..!
 
Top