Feature table: >100 features in Cisco 300 Series which are lacking in HP 1910/2530

[Ivor Diedricks]

On a technical level, Cisco 300 Series is far superior to the HP 1910 and 2530 products. This document provides evidence that Cisco has >100 features not supported by the HP platforms. Check this out and decide for yourselves.

Notes (2/5/2014):

- Information in this document is accurate to the best of our knowledge based on publicly available documentation from HP on this date

- You are encouraged to validate this content and notify us if discrepancies are found - we will make corrections

- Most of the items below (>90%) are advantages over HP 2530 as well

[jialbert]

No surprise to see the gap. Inherently, S300 is built upon better hardware component (switch/PoE chipset, power supply), industry leading software feature based on user experience (Routing/Switching, Voice, Security, QoS, IPv6, wireless), and will evolve with customer's business need.

[yingjian]

S300 have strong features than HP products, such as POE.We can provide more power for our customer to help them save cost.

[JoyGain10]

The GUI design of the Cisco device is better, and the command line interface is very similar to Catalyst which makes it easy for deployment in networks where Catalyst is the CORE router.

[deehuang]

The Web Interface is very nice which allow user do most of the thing without using CLI commands, easy to use and must more easy to understand than the CLI commands.

The PoE feature is the plus.

[Asif P Abubackar]

Does any one have an updated document? I am looking for an updated comparison between Cisco and HP in DC as well as campus network.

HP proposed is 2920-48-POE+, 3800-48-POE+ in access layer, 5406 and 5930 in distribution and aggregation layer of campus.

In DC nexus 7700 has been replaced with flex fabric 12900 and enterprise mpls core 7K has been replaced with HP 7900.

Does any one have a sheet?