Cisco Catalyst C1300-8FP-2G Review a 10-Port PoE Managed Switch from Cisco

9

Cisco Catalyst C1300-8FP-2G Performance

For this, we are using a Keysight XGS2 chassis with the NOVUS10/1GE16DP card. We are using an RFC2544 Quick Test for throughput with a few changes. For example, we increased the per-iteration run time to 30 seconds and started at 10% of the full line rate, searching for frame loss up to 100% of the line rate. We also test the RFC2544 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 1280, and 1518 byte frame sizes, and then add the standard IMIX, the Cisco IMIX, and an IPSec IMIX, which introduces mixed frame sizes into the testing.

Cisco Catalyst C1300 8FP 2G IxNetwork 64B Test
Cisco Catalyst C1300 8FP 2G IxNetwork 64B Test

At 64B, we got full line rate 1Gbps performance. The maximum latency seemed a bit higher than we might have expected, but we might need to test more 1GbE switches. On the other end of the frame size spectrum, the 1518B size also did line rate L1 traffic without any frame losses, but the latency was higher.

Cisco Catalyst C1300 8FP 2G IxNetwork 1518B Test
Cisco Catalyst C1300 8FP 2G IxNetwork 1518B Test

Here is the IMIX test where we use different size frames instead of a uniform size.

Cisco Catalyst C1300 8FP 2G IxNetwork IMIX Test
Cisco Catalyst C1300 8FP 2G IxNetwork IMIX Test

One of the standard Keysight profiles is Cisco IMIX, which we have been using as part of our test suite.

Cisco Catalyst C1300 8FP 2G IxNetwork Cisco IMIX Test
Cisco Catalyst C1300 8FP 2G IxNetwork Cisco IMIX Test

Here are the IPSec IMIX test results:

Cisco Catalyst C1300 8FP 2G IxNetwork IPsec IMIX Test
Cisco Catalyst C1300 8FP 2G IxNetwork IPsec IMIX Test

Perhaps the three big findings were that the throughput and frame loss figures were exactly what we would expect. The maximum latency and jitter figures were a bit higher than we would have expected.

Cisco Catalyst C1300-8FP-2G Power Consumption and Noise

On the power consumption side, we saw around 9W at idle. Generally, we would expect a 1GbE switch to sip power, but this is using a higher-end switch chip with PoE, which both add to idle power consumption.

Cisco Catalyst 1300 8FP 2G Idle Power Consumption 1
Cisco Catalyst 1300 8FP 2G Idle Power Consumption 1

Adding a 1GbE port added 2W.

Cisco Catalyst 1300 8FP 2G RJ45GbE PoE+ Port Power Conumption 1
Cisco Catalyst 1300 8FP 2G RJ45GbE PoE+ Port Power Conumption 1

One big benefit of this design is that it is passively cooled. Since there are no fans inside, it is a silent switch, which is not bad for a 120W PoE+ switch. Let us get to that PoE feature next.

Cisco Catalyst C1300-8FP-2G PoE Testing

We hooked up both the Fluke LinkIQ-Duo (Amazon Affiliate) and the MicroScanner PoE (Amazon Affiliate.) Sometimes, such as with some Ubiquiti products, we get different results on the two based on how PoE is implemented.

Cisco Catalyst C1300 8FP 2G PoE Testing With Fluke Large
Cisco Catalyst C1300 8FP 2G PoE Testing With Fluke Large

Here you can see the ports negotiate down to 10base-T half duplex, but also both show 25.5W PoE+ ports.

Final Words

The Cisco Catalyst C1300-8FP-2G is a really well put-together switch. As we move up the stack, the higher-end models include higher-end features, not just faster ports. Instead of being built like an ultra-low-cost design, engineers put thought into cooling the switch, the higher-end Marvell Prestera, Alaska V parts, and even the management. We often see these retail for $400 or so, and that is far from “cheap” these days for a 1GbE switch.

Cisco Catalyst 1300 8FP 2G Front Angled 2
Cisco Catalyst 1300 8FP 2G Front Angled 2

You might pay a bit more for this one, but it is easy to see the value proposition. This is a device that is clearly both a low-end device in Cisco’s Catalyst portfolio, but also packs a lot of great functionality.

Where to Buy

If you want to purchase one, here is an Amazon affiliate link.

9 COMMENTS

  1. It’s amazing you’re doing Cisco reviews. There’s jack all of information on these. I hope Arista and Juniper follow. We need this. This is the best review of a Cisco switch in? Forever? I’d like to see more features tested surly others too, but I hope you’re testing more of the C1300X

  2. would be nice to compare this to Mikrotik Netpower 16p

    Both fanless, cli + web management and POE. Main difference is the Mikrotik has two SFP+ ports and double the POE ports and cost almost half the Cisco does?

  3. Can you do this for the bigger Cisco models? Most Cisco reviews I’ve seen don’t have any good testing

  4. I’m amazed that it has a default username and password, given they’re based in California and it’s not legal to have a default password for internet-connected devices (SB-327). A switch isn’t internet-connected, but I would have thought they’d remove default passwords across their whole lineup.

  5. The lower-priced SOHO 1300/x Ciscos are interesting and not prohibitively expensive. Its regreattable there does not seem to be a 8X 1gb poe – 8x 2,5 poe – 2-4 sfp+ uplink. It would fill a lot of needs for IP-cams, and mesh Wifi7 APs.
    Could be STH should check out these as well:
    C1300-8MGP-2X
    C1300-24MGP-4X

  6. Add to above:
    In EU the tested one costs 350-400€.

    The C1300-8MGP-2X is more interesting if you have Wifi7 & future-proof. Around 500€. It has 4x 1G poE, 4x 2.5 PoE & 2 SPF+. Passive. I think this has layer 3.

    A 8x 1G PoE, 4×2.5 PoE & 4x SFP+ be interesting.

    There is an 10x 10gb port. C1300-12XS 1000€.

    Cisco C1300X-10NU-2X is 16x 5gb PoE. Funny. 830€.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.