Product comparison · 2 network switches

D-Link 26-port Managed Layer 2 Workgroup Switch vs NETGEAR ProSafe 48 Port 10/100 Stackable Smart Switch + 4 Gigabit Ports

5specifications compared
5differ
0identical
23known for one product only

Key differences

Basic switching RJ-45 Ethernet ports quantity
- 26-port Managed Layer 2 Workgroup Switch:26
- ProSafe 48 Port 10/100 Stackable Smart Switch + 4 Gigabit Ports:52
Maximum data transfer rate
- 26-port Managed Layer 2 Workgroup Switch:0.1 Gbit/s
- ProSafe 48 Port 10/100 Stackable Smart Switch + 4 Gigabit Ports:1 Gbit/s
Data transfer rate
- 26-port Managed Layer 2 Workgroup Switch:100 Mbit/s
- ProSafe 48 Port 10/100 Stackable Smart Switch + 4 Gigabit Ports:1000 Mbit/s

Side by side

Differences highlightedShow differences only

Comparison of 26-port Managed Layer 2 Workgroup Switch, ProSafe 48 Port 10/100 Stackable Smart Switch + 4 Gigabit Ports
28 specifications	A D-Link 26-port Managed Layer 2 Workgroup Switch View product	B NETGEAR ProSafe 48 Port 10/100 Stackable Smart Switch + 4 Gigabit Ports View product
Ports & interfaces1 differ
Basic switching RJ-45 Ethernet ports quantityDiffers	26	52
Network1 differ
Copper ethernet cabling technologyDiffers	100Base-TX, 10Base-T	1000BASE-T, 100BASE-TX, 10BASE-T
Networking standardsKnown for one	IEEE 802.1p, IEEE 802.1Q, IEEE 802.3ad, IEEE 802.3u	Unknown — not stated by the source
Full duplexKnown for one	Yes	Unknown — not stated by the source
Data transmission1 differ
MAC address tableKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	8000 entries
Switching capacityKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	17.6 Gbit/s
Maximum data transfer rateDiffers	0.1 Gbit/s	1 Gbit/s
Packet buffer memoryKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	0.125 MB
Protocolsidentical
Data link protocolsKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Ethernet, Fast Ethernet, Gigabit Ethernet
Management protocolsKnown for one	SNMP v.1, v.2c, v.3, RMON (1,2,3,9), Telnet	Unknown — not stated by the source
Designidentical
SafetyKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	CE mark, commercial; CUL 60950 (Listed)/ EN60950 (Low Voltage Directive)
Performanceidentical
Mean time between failures (MTBF)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	84000 h
Minimum system requirementsKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	-Category 5 network cables -Network card -Network software(e.g., Windows)
Poweridentical
Power consumption (typical)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	15 W
Other features2 differ
LatencyKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	20 µs
Data transfer rateDiffers	100 Mbit/s	1000 Mbit/s
Dimensions (WxDxH)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	440 x 205 x 43 mm
Power requirementsKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	100-240VAC/50-60 Hz
Electromagnetic emissionsKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	CE mark, commercial; FCC Part 15 Class A; VCCI Class A; EN 55022 (CISPR 22); EN 55024 (CISPR 24); C-Tick
I/O portsDiffers	24x 10/100 Ethernet 1x RS-232 Console 1x Power	-48 10/100 Mbps auto sensing Fast Ethernet -4 x RJ-45 Gigabit Ethernet (10/100/1000 Mbps) -2 SFP slots (fiber Gigabit Ethernet)
Management platformKnown for one	Web-based, CLI	Unknown — not stated by the source
Connectivity technologyKnown for one	Wired	Unknown — not stated by the source
Authentication methodKnown for one	RADIUS, 802.1x	Unknown — not stated by the source
Networking featuresKnown for one	Ethernet, Fast Ethernet	Unknown — not stated by the source
Expansion slotsKnown for one	2x Mini GBIC	Unknown — not stated by the source
Operational conditionsidentical
Operating temperature (T-T)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	0 - 50 °C
Storage temperature (T-T)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	-20 - 70 °C
Weight & dimensionsidentical
WeightKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	2.98 kg

A dash means the value is not stated by the source. Unknown values are never counted for or against a product, and there is no overall score.

More network switch comparisons

All network switch comparisons