[c-nsp] 3750G vs. Nexus for a SAN

[Flint, Chris]

Hi Jason,

I'd second the recommendation for a 4948 instead of a 3750E.  The 3750E has issues pushing large flows of traffic that the 4948 doesn't have.  From what I've seen on the list, the 3750E is built to be a fast desktop aggregation switch, and the 4948 is built for server aggregation.  

Also, the Nexus 5010's only offer 8 ports of 1G or 10G, and the rest are 10G only.



Chris


===============================
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2009 09:54:33 -0500
From: Jeff Kell <jeff-kell at utc.edu>
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 3750G vs. Nexus for a SAN
Message-ID: <4AF438A9.7030800 at utc.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Jason Gurtz wrote:
> We're looking to build a SAN, probably iSCSI and everyone keeps quoting
> the 3750G for top of the rack.

We have one iSCSI array on a 4948 (another alternative).

Jeff

===========================
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:34:22 -0500
From: "Jason Gurtz" <jasongurtz at npumail.com>
To: <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [c-nsp] 3750G vs. Nexus for a SAN
Message-ID:
	<A92EAF652EC423438D55C14C60771C8701C32148 at exchgsrv.nputilities.local>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

We're looking to build a SAN, probably iSCSI and everyone keeps quoting
the 3750G for top of the rack.  From looking at specs/marketing material,
it seems like two Nexus 5010 at top of rack would be a better choice in
this application. Generally, comments seem pretty good as long as advanced
features aren't needed.

Is Nexus that much more expensive that no one is quoting it? or is it more
for FCoE?  Or is the 3750G just "good enough?"  Or no one has the
experience to quote?

~JasonG