Other than FCoE, the major difference is L3 switching. The 5010 is a Layer2-only device and the 4900M can do routing. If you're trying to shave off microseconds, the 5010 will beat the 4900M in switching latency. On the other hand, the 4900M is modular and well suited for mixed, low-density 1gig/10gig deployments.
Darrin Machay YJT Solutions 440 South LaSalle St, Suite 3990 Chicago, IL 60605 Office: 312-362-4712 Cell: 312-961-6977 [email protected] www.YJTSolutions.com -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Malitsky Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2009 4:12 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [c-nsp] Catalyst vs. Nexus Hello, I am working on the first 10Gig deployment in a small data center. Main driver is a SQL database, so there will be a bunch of SQL servers virtualized using VMware, running against a SAN over iSCSI. I've done some research and it looks like I can build the network using a Catalyst 4900M or a Nexus 5010, at about the same cost. I am familiar with the Catalyst family, but have no experience with the Nexus. At this point, the only major difference I see is that Nexus supports Fibre Channel (which I don't need). For being different product families, I am having a hard time understanding what the major differences are. Can anyone enlighten me? If anyone has hands-on experience with both and willing to share, that would be most appreciated. Thanks, Michael Malitsky _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
