PoE Requirement: 30W (PoE+) standard; 60W with expansion module
Curation Review
✔ Pros:Enterprise-grade Wi-Fi 6 with excellent performance and range; 4x4 MIMO and OFDMA for high-density environments; Advanced security (WPA3, OKC, KRACK mitigation); Flexible wall/ceiling/mount deployment; Cloud or on-premises controller management available
✘ Cons:High cost (~$1.2–$1.8K per unit); Requires wireless controller or cloud management (not standalone); PoE+ requirement limits switch compatibility options; Overkill for small office/SOHO deployments; Limited to 1 Gbps uplink (no 2.5G or 10G variants); Higher power consumption than prior-gen APs
Est. Price:
$1,200 - $1,800
Compare Against
Cisco Catalyst 9178i
★ 4.3 Value Score
Technical Specifications
Switching Capacity: 204.8 Tbps (full chassis)
Forwarding Rate: 204.8 Tbps
Ports: Up to 288 u00d7 10/25/40/100 Gbps (via modular line cards)
Layer: L2/L3
Stacking Support: Yes (up to 9 units via Stacking Cables)
Chassis Type: 3-slot modular chassis
PoE Budget: Up to 5.6 kW per module (optional PoE+ modules)
Max Power Consumption: 10.2 kW (full chassis)
Backplane Bandwidth: 204.8 Tbps
Throughput per Port: Up to 100 Gbps per port
Cooling: Redundant, variable-speed fans
Uplinks: Multiple 100 Gbps QSFP28 capable
Curation Review
✔ Pros:Industry-leading 204.8 Tbps switching fabric supports next-generation high-density deployments; Modular architecture allows flexible line-card configurations for different port densities and speeds; Full redundancy support (PSU, fan, uplinks) ensures carrier-grade reliability; Native support for Cisco DNA Center and SD-Access intent-based networking; Excellent in-service upgrade capabilities with no traffic disruption
✘ Cons:Significantly higher capital cost compared to fixed-configuration switches; Requires skilled technical staff for modular line-card installation and configuration; Power and cooling infrastructure overhead for large deployments; Complexity of managing modular chassis in smaller networks may be overkill; Limited flexibility in port mix compared to disaggregated options