Favorite Network Switches for Surveillance 2015

By Ethan Ace, Published Mar 24, 2015, 12:00am EDT

5 manufacturers stood out as integrator favorites for network switches from more than 140 votes / explanations submitted.

These 2015 statistics replace our 2012 network switch favorite results.

In this note, we break down: favorite 5 switch manufacturers, the top cited individual models and what the major changes were over the past three years.

  • The favorite 5 switch manufacturers
  • The top cited individual models 
  • What the major changes were over the past three years
  • Why integrators picked what they did with color commentary

*** *********

**** ***** ***** *** responses:

** **** *** **** results, *****, **, *** Netgear **** ***** ********* the ********* **** **** 70% ** *********** ********* one ** ***** *****. Cisco *** **** ********** their *** ******** ***** integrators, *** ************ **, with * ****** ********** of *********** ********* **** in **** ****** **** previous. ******* ******* ********, down ~*% **** *** 2012 ****** (**% **. 20%), ***** ** ******** nearly *** ****, **% vs. **%.

***** **** *** *** mentions, ****** *** ******** both ******** **** **** 5% ** *** ****, a ****** *********** **** 2012.

** *****, ** ************* were ***** ** ********* but ***** **** ***** listed ****, **** ******** more **** *** *****.

*****

**** *****, **** *********** chose********* *** ***** ****** brand. **% ** *********** chose **** ** ********, up **** **% ** our **** *******. ***********, performance, 

  • ***** - ** * wise *** **** **** me; "** *** *** ever **** ***** *** choosing *****."
  • **'* *** ** ** Cisco, *****? *** *** my *** **********, *** because *** ** ****** are ******* ******* ********* that ******** *********** *** idiots **** ** ***** to **********, *** ******* up **** ***** * only ***** ** ********* that ********.
  • ***** ********: *** ***** wide ***** ** ******* protocol ******* ********* **-** features, ********* ********* *** routing, **** ***********, ******** and ********** ***. * host ** *************** *** management ******** *** **** useful.
  • ***** - *********** *** support
  • *****, **** *****, **** quality *** *****
  • *****. ***** *** **** performance *** **** ********** features.

***** ***** ********

* ****** ** *********** specifically **************'* ***** ******** ****, **** ***** *** 300 ******:

  • ***** ***** ********. **** haven't **** ******* ** forever, *** **** ******** to ******* ** ***** of ***** *** ***********
  • ***** *****-****-**-** *****-**** **-**** 10/100 ***+ ******* ****** w/Gig ******* ******** *** cost *** ******.
  • ***** *** ***/*** ******. Good *** ** ******** for *** ***** *****.
  • ***** ****** **** *****. Very ********, **********, ******* for ****** *** *** types, **** **** ********.
  • ***** *** - **** and **********
  • ***** *** ****** ***** business ******

**

********** ***** ****** ******* in *** **** ******, HP [**** ** ****** available] ***** ** ****** with ~**% ** ***********. Those ******** ** ***** their ***** **** ******** features *** * ***** lower **** *****. ******* ********* **** ******** *********. 

  • ******-*-***+ ****** *** ******-**-***+ Switch. **** *** ***** 3 *** ******** **** SFP *****. ** *** currently ******* **** ** a ***** **** ******* us ** **** **** from ********, **** *** HP ****, *** ***** be ***********.
  • ** **** ** **** effective *** ****** ** use.
  • * *** ** ***-***** line *** *** ****** projects. **** *** **** solid ********** *********** *********** the ******** **** ****. Nice *** ********* *** people **** *** *** Command **** *******. **** security ******** (* ****** port ******** *** ******* all ****** *****).
  • *** * **** ****** we *** ** ** 5400 ****** ****** *** for ** ****** ***** switch ** *** ** 2920 ******.
  • ** ******** - ********** affordable, **** **********, ******** warranty
  • ** ***** **** *********** and *******-*** (**** *********) for **** *****.
  • ** ****** ******* *** price ** **********, **** to ********* *** ********
  • ** ******** - **** range ** ******* ******** for ***** **** ** application, ******* ************* ** Cisco *** ** * much ***** ****.
  • ** - ******* ** lower ****, *** ****** performance ******** ** *****.
  • ** **** ******, ******* they ***** * **** cost-benefit ***** *** *** easy ** ********* (**** out ** *** ***). Plus *** **** ******* easily ****** *** ** ports **** *** **,** at ****.
  • ** ******** - *************** with * *** **** support, *** *****

*******

*********** ** ***** **** ~14% ** *** ****, down **** **% **********. Those *** ***** ******* cited *** **** *** reliability ** *** *** reasons, **** *************** **** *******:

  • ** **** **** ***** the ******* *** **** Smart ****** ****** **** great *******. ******* ***** is $***.** ******* **** it's ***** *** ****** counterpart. **** ******** *** priced *****. **'** **** had * ***** *** on ** ** * years. ****** ** ***** Cisco, ** **** **** Netgear.
  • ******* ********. **** ***** us ** *** ***** at *** *****, ** well ** ********** **********. We *** **** ****** the *****, ** ******, and ***** *** ******* available **** **** ******* including ****** *** ******. If ** **** * few **** *******, *** GS752TP ****** *** ** PoE ***** (*******), *** at *** **** *** watts (**** ** ***** expansion **********), ** ** know *** ** *** crazy **** **.
  • ******* ***** ****** ****. Good *****, *** ******** connect ** ** *** they **** * ******** warranty.
  • ******* **-*****. ** **** POE ******. **** ** set **, **** ********
  • ******* ***** - *********** and ********* ** ***** one ~* ***** *** and ***** **** ****.
  • *******. **** **** *** the ****. *** ******* series *** ******** ********.
  • ******* ****** ***** *** always ********* ** * local ********
  • *******, ***** ****** ************, good ***** *****.
  • ** *** ******* ******** as *** ***** ******
  • *******, ***** *** * problem, ****** ***********.

******

******'* ******** ******** *** cited ** ******** ***********, along **** **** *******.

  • ******. ***** ******. ***** 2. ******** ********
  • ******** ********, ******* *** tech *******.
  • ****** **** *** **** series. ** **** **** support **** *** ***** rep. *** ***** ***** for *** ***+ *** throughput ** * **** value. **** **** **** working **** ** *** field ** *** **** quick *** ** *** few ******* ******.

********

***** ***************** ******* ** *** ***** as *** *** ******: 

  • * **** ******** ** not ********* ** ******* running ** ******** ********. We ****** ******* ******** for *** ******* *** they **** ** **** and **** ***** *** test ** ****. * haven't *** *** ******* and *** *** **** of ** **. * high *** ****** ** it **** **** *'** just *** ** * brand *** *** *** it ****'* **** ** that *** ** ******** switched **** ** ****** switches *-* ***** ***. I **** ***** **** 100+ ******* *** ******** loaded ** ** ******** that *** ******* ********.
  • *** **** **** ** so ** **** **** using ********, ***** ***** well, ****** ***** *** we *****'* *** *** problems.
  • ******** ***+ ****** **** value, ************, ***********

Comments (8)

Brian Tally

03/24/15 06:18pm

We have standardized on Cisco for the most part. For rugged/industrial applications we having been using MOXA switches.

One thing to note, we have standardized on managed POE midspans and injectors. POE on even very expensive switches is not made for surveillance cameras and eventually fails.

Avatar

Ethan Ace

IPVM | In reply to Brian Tally | 03/24/15 06:23pm

Brian, related: PoE: Switch vs. Midspan Results

Brian Tally

In reply to Ethan Ace | 03/24/15 06:26pm

I'd be interested in a follow up to that article Ethan :)

Avatar

Jeffrey Hinckley

Unemployed | 03/25/15 01:55pm

I think it also depends on where you live. In my case (Maine) we need to have cameras that operate to less than -22 F. We used to use 24VAC and a seperate conductor pair, but now use mostly POE+ power and CAT6 on newer exterior cameras to achieve this. We must have a power budget on a POE+ switch that allows several exterior cameras (plus more for upgrades) plus the interior POE cameras. The specifications on the HP and Cisco switches (above) looks like < 200 watts of power budget (24 port switch) which is just not going to cut it. The GS728 has ample power available.

Does anybody that uses these know if there is any form of power upgrades for these models (Cisco or HP) or any of the other stated models?

Avatar

Jon Dillabaugh

Pro Focus LLC
In reply to Jeffrey Hinckley | 03/26/15 01:55pm

Ubiquiti has 24 port 500W and 48 port 750W models. That's what we have been using lately. The 48 port also has 2 SFP and 2 SFP+ ports in addition to the 48 copper gig ports. They also do light layer 3, which we haven't used.

Avatar

Shaun Castillo

IPVMU Certified | 03/25/15 11:59pm

Don't overlook Antaira for industrial switch applications (e.g. in outdoor enclosure). They make solid products at a great price point.

Undisclosed Integrator #1

04/07/15 08:09pm

Have any installers using Cisco switches had any problems procurring, or know not to tell their distribution source (i.e. CDW, Provantage, etc) that the switches are not for resale? Because last I knew, even the small business class line required you to be an authorized reseller if it was being purchased by anyone for resell and not the person's/business's own use. Part of the reason we stopped using them, along with flaky behavior we experiend with them. CDW learned we were reselling them for installations and stop selling them immediately to us.

Antaira is a pretty good hardened switch and so far has worked well for us. They don't have a broad enough general use line.

zachary sayer

06/11/15 02:53pm

Our company uses Trendnet because of cost as well. They hold up as well

Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 6,731 reports, 908 tests and is only available to members. To get a one-time preview of our work, enter your work email to access the full article.

Already a member? Login here | Join now
Loading Related Reports