Which switch is which- looking at the 2960, 3560, & 3750

unnamed
Share this blog:Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookShare on TumblrPrint this pageEmail this to someoneShare on StumbleUponShare on Google+Share on Reddit

Cisco Switch Comparison: 2960 vs 3560 vs 3750

The 2960-S, 3560G and 3750G are among the most popular and widely used switches in the Cisco device portfolio.  Although all three of these product lines may seem similar in basic function, they are actually very unique, and can serve your business in a variety of different ways. The information below will help you to ensure you get the perfect hardware for your next install, without overspending on unnecessary features.

The 3560 and 3750 series switches are nearly identical in every way, but do have some differences. The software available for these switches is the same, and the hardware comes in the same basic platforms – but one primary difference between these two models is the cost of the switch, and the inclusion of stacking ports on the 3750 model. Because of this, when you come to a decision between a 3750 and a 3560 switch, the only real question you need to ask is “do I need this switch to be stackable”. If the answer is no, you may be able to save you and your business some money be going an alternative route and purchasing a 3560 switch. If ‘stackability’ is needed, the 2960-S offers stacking with the inclusion of an optional Flex-Stack module, but the 2960-S only allows for stacks of up to 4 switches, while the 3750 allows for stacks of up to 9.

One switch that may stand out when doing a side-by-side comparison is the 2960. This line of switch differs more substantially from the 3560 and 3750 in that the 2960 is a layer two switch, while the 3560 and 3750 are layer three switches. This means the 2960 is incapable of performing its own routing, and must be attached to a separate router in order to send traffic between vlans. The 3560 and 3750 on the other hand, support basic routing protocols, and can route local traffic without adding an extra hop to your packet transport, making them desirable for core applications where considerable amounts of inter vlan routing occur on a single switch.

In short, if you are buying a basic access switch, you may want to go with a 2960. Even in high volume deployments where you require a stack, the 2960-S fits the bill. For edge deployments, or installs that require more complicated services on-switch, such as routing or advanced QoS, the 3560 and 3750 series switches are the way to go. If you need to stack, use the 3750 – if you don’t, go with a 3560.

If you  would like more in depth information regarding the features of these product lines, or would like to talk to our engineers about  how these switches could fit in your specific network, don’t hesitate to contact us – we’d love to hear from you!

2960S 3560G 3750G
Comes in 24 + 48 port models
10/100/1000 ports
Copper and SFP uplinks available
PoE Models Available
Layer 2 Layer 2/3
No inter-vlan routing Inter Vlan Routing
Optional Flex Stack Module No Stacking Built In Stack-Wise Support
40gb/s stacking No stacking 32 Gb/s stacking
Stack up to 4 switches No stacking Stack up to 9 switches

 

Switch Models:

Cisco Catalyst 2960S-48FPD-L 48 2 SFP+ LAN Base 740W Optional
Cisco Catalyst 2960S-48LPD-L 48 2 SFP+ LAN Base 370W Optional
Cisco Catalyst 2960S-24PD-L 24 2 SFP+ LAN Base 370W Optional
Cisco Catalyst 2960S-48TD-L 48 2 SFP+ LAN Base Optional
Cisco Catalyst 2960S-24TD-L 24 2 SFP+ LAN Base Optional
Cisco Catalyst 2960S-48FPS-L 48 4 SFP LAN Base 740W Optional
Cisco Catalyst 2960S-48LPS-L 48 4 SFP LAN Base 370W Optional
Cisco Catalyst 2960S-24PS-L 24 4 SFP LAN Base 370W Optional
Cisco Catalyst 2960S-48TS-L 48 4 SFP LAN Base Optional
Cisco Catalyst 2960S-24TS-L 24 4 SFP LAN Base Optional
Cisco Catalyst 2960S-48TS-S 48 2 SFP LAN Lite No
Cisco Catalyst 2960S-24TS-S 24 2 SFP LAN Lite No

P3 Button

 

Share this blog:Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookShare on TumblrPrint this pageEmail this to someoneShare on StumbleUponShare on Google+Share on Reddit
Read More