Product comparison · 2 network transceiver modules

Cudy 25G SFP28 Multi-Mode Optical Module, SM25GMA-01 1.0 vs Origin Storage X65404 NetApp compatible Transceiver SFP28 25GBase-SR (850nm MMF 100m LC DOM)

10specifications compared
4differ
6identical
21known for one product only

Key differences

The Origin Storage X65404 NetApp compatible Transceiver SFP28 25GBase-SR (850nm MMF 100m LC DOM) has 75,000 Mbit/s more maximum data transfer rate than the Cudy 25G SFP28 Multi-Mode Optical Module, SM25GMA-01 1.0 (100000 Mbit/s vs 25000 Mbit/s). Interface type: SFP28 on the Cudy 25G SFP28 Multi-Mode Optical Module, SM25GMA-01 1.0, QSFP28 on the Origin Storage X65404 NetApp compatible Transceiver SFP28 25GBase-SR (850nm MMF 100m LC DOM). Fiber optic connector: LC on the Cudy 25G SFP28 Multi-Mode Optical Module, SM25GMA-01 1.0, MPO-12 on the Origin Storage X65404 NetApp compatible Transceiver SFP28 25GBase-SR (850nm MMF 100m LC DOM).

Maximum data transfer rate
- 25G SFP28 Multi-Mode Optical Module, SM25GMA-01 1.0:25000 Mbit/s
- X65404 NetApp compatible Transceiver SFP28 25GBase-SR (850nm MMF 100m LC DOM):100000 Mbit/s
Interface type
- 25G SFP28 Multi-Mode Optical Module, SM25GMA-01 1.0:SFP28
- X65404 NetApp compatible Transceiver SFP28 25GBase-SR (850nm MMF 100m LC DOM):QSFP28
Fiber optic connector
- 25G SFP28 Multi-Mode Optical Module, SM25GMA-01 1.0:LC
- X65404 NetApp compatible Transceiver SFP28 25GBase-SR (850nm MMF 100m LC DOM):MPO-12

Side by side

Differences highlightedShow differences only

Comparison of 25G SFP28 Multi-Mode Optical Module, SM25GMA-01 1.0, X65404-OS
31 specifications	A Cudy 25G SFP28 Multi-Mode Optical Module, SM25GMA-01 1.0 View product	B Origin Storage X65404 NetApp compatible Transceiver SFP28 25GBase-SR (850nm MMF 100m LC DOM) Model X65404-OS View product
Performance3 differ
Maximum data transfer rateDiffers	25000 Mbit/s	100000 Mbit/s
Interface typeDiffers	SFP28	QSFP28
Single-mode fiber (SMF) supportedKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	No
Fiber optic connectorDiffers	LC	MPO-12
Ethernet LANKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
Ethernet interface typeKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	100 Gigabit Ethernet
Duplex systemKnown for one	Full	Unknown — not stated by the source
Digital Diagnostics Monitoring (DDM)Known for one	Yes	Unknown — not stated by the source
Featuresidentical
Housing materialKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Metal
Plug and PlayKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
Hot-Plug supportKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
Hot-swapKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
Easy to installKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
Brand compatibilityKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	NetApp
Poweridentical
Input voltageKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	3.3 V
Certificates1 differ
Compliance certificatesDiffers	RoHS, Federal Communications Commission (FCC), CE	Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC), REACH, RoHS, CE, Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
CertificationKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	CE, FCC, RoHS, REACH
Sustainabilityidentical
Doesn't containKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Lead
Operational conditionsidentical
Minimum operating temperatureKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	0 °C
Maximum operating temperatureKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	70 °C
Operating temperature (T-T)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	0 - 70 °C
Storage temperature (T-T)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	-40 - 85 °C
Packaging dataidentical
Package typeKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Blister
Logistics dataidentical
Country of originKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Taiwan, China
Warranty periodKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	20 year(s)

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 transceiver module comparisons

All network transceiver module comparisons