WS-C4500X-16 replace with C9300X-24Y-E or C9500-24Y4C-E-A?

[NeverOutofTune]

I have a pair of the 4500Xs in a VSS configuration as a core for a small network (300 users) handling VLAN routing, a few ACLs, Etherchannels to Nexus Server/Storage switches (10G copper), Access Switches (1G SFPs) plus a few 10G connections to servers and future firewall.

I need to migrate to a newer platform for EOL reasons.  Originally, I planned to use C9500-24Y4C-E but discovered it does not support Stack-Wise without having the -A Advanced image $$$.  I then started looking at a C9300X-24Y-E which has (24) SFP28 ports and optional network module (which I don't need today).

Would a pair of C9300X-24Y-E be a good switch stack, handle the 20+ VLANs, a vew ACLs, and static routing as a direct  replacement for my WS-C4500X-16's?

[balaji.bandi]

For your question - Cat 9300 May be suitable YES /NO , depends on what kind of Traffic it is handling.

As per Cisco CVD and features, Cat 4500 replaced with Cat 9400 or Cat 9500 is the best Opition

If you are loking to replace with VSS , then suggest to use SVL (stackwise virtual)

Stack with essential also have Limitation compare to network advantage License.

So compare both the product, switch capacity, bandwidth requirement (not just 10 VLAN).

Note : some time 300users Cat 9300 is good enough, (depends on application and throuput and what is the requirement) - please take wise decision than sorry later.

[ammahend]

agree with balaji, additionally, C9300 supports 30,000 mac address compared to 82000 on 9500.

9300 supports 32000 arp/host entries compared to 90000+ on 9500.

if these numbers are under your current limit and future expansion plan then it should work for most part, base on your description, you can look at your current stats in peak hours and compare, if you exceed these values today or in future, you will start to see intermittent disconnection issues.