QNAP Launches Affordable 16-Port SFP28 Layer 2 Managed Switch

[TheLostSwede]

Although most people use WiFi for their network connectivity these days, there are times when a wired connection is needed, say for large file transfer and backups. We've finally seen a transition onwards from Gigabit Ethernet on the humble desktop PC, but for some 2.5 Gbps isn't enough and 10 Gbps has become more and more of a viable option. However, it seems like QNAP has decided that 10 Gbps is getting a bit long in the tooth and as such, the company has introduced a 16-port SFP28 switch, for those that are craving even faster LAN speeds.

The QSW-M5216-1T has a combined switching capacity of 820 Gbps and all of the 25 Gbps SFP28 ports are backwards compatible with 10 Gbps SFP+ based network cards. There's also a single multi-gig capable RJ45 port that goes from 100 Mps to 10 Gbps, plus a 1 Gbps management port, as well as a serial port around the back for management. The QSW-M5216-1T is also capable of combining four ports into a 100 Gbps capable link, when combined with QNAP's QXG-100G2SF-E810 100 Gbps capable network card, although it retails for north of US$1,000. A more reasonable alternative would be the US$219 QXG-25G2SF-CX4 dual-port 25 Gbps card, which seems quite reasonably priced for the speeds on offer.




As this is a managed layer 2 switch, it supports features like LACP. VLAN, QoS and ICMP snooping, as well as a range of other features you'd find on this type of switch. Surprisingly, QNAP claims a 35 W max power consumption, so hopefully that also means it won't sound like a jet engine when in use. Although the QSW-M5216-1T might be intended for business use, since most people aren't going to install fibre based networks at home, the price point is quite alluring for those that would like to move up to 25 Gbps network speeds. In Taiwan, QNAP lists the QSW-M5216-1T for around US$1,385, which is less than US$87 per port, which compares favourably to similar 10 Gbps switches.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[zlobby]

How it is managed but still layer 2?

Besides, for that price you'd get a decent MikroTik at leats.

 

[LabRat 891]

How it is managed but still layer 2?

Besides, for that price you'd get a decent MikroTik at leats.

I'm not experienced enough to really get into it, but in my research QNAP is much more highly regarded versus Mikrotik or Ubiquiti (my current switch).
This QNAP is approaching affordability when you consider the use cases.

 

[Blue4130]

How it is managed but still layer 2?

Besides, for that price you'd get a decent MikroTik at leats.

Mikrotik has 25g switches?

 

[zlobby]

Mikrotik has 25g switches?

They have mix of 40G anf 10G. You can use 25G SFP, though.

I'm not experienced enough to really get into it, but in my research QNAP is much more highly regarded versus Mikrotik or Ubiquiti (my current switch).
This QNAP is approaching affordability when you consider the use cases.

Stability, flexibility and security of ROS is still way ahead of QNAP's, although I'm sure the later will catch up in a couple of years.

 

[Blue4130]

They have mix of 40G anf 10G. You can use 25G SFP, though.


Stability, flexibility and security of ROS is still way ahead of QNAP's, although I'm sure the later will catch up in a couple of years.

All I can find are switches with at most 2 40g uplink ports. Not 16 ports like this. Have a link?

 

[zlobby]

All I can find are switches with at most 2 40g uplink ports. Not 16 ports like this. Have a link?

No, not for 16 ports, actually.

 

[TheLostSwede]

I'm not experienced enough to really get into it, but in my research QNAP is much more highly regarded versus Mikrotik or Ubiquiti (my current switch).
This QNAP is approaching affordability when you consider the use cases.

Not sure that's true, as QNAP has had its fair share of security issues, although that's mostly related to their NAS products.
They're still very green when it comes to network products, but seem to be really pushing out the boat and trying to win market share by having decent pricing on a lot of things.

 

[Pepamami]

How it is managed but still layer 2?

Besides, for that price you'd get a decent MikroTik at leats.

MikroTik got 10Gx24+40Gx2 max, this one is 25Gx16, and its not bad for this price.
But I still dont like missing secodary spare power supply: I see only 1 power socket :C

 

[Mussels]

Oh good, now i just need network cards with 4x 25Gb ports, and i can finally live the dream of having ethernet faster than my entire countries internet infrastructure combined

 

[zlobby]

Oh good, now i just need network cards with 4x 25Gb ports, and i can finally live the dream of having ethernet faster than my entire countries internet infrastructure combined

Lol! Where is that? In many countries FTTH is a common thing. Sadly, in other 'developed' countries majority of users are dealing with DSL...

MikroTik got 10Gx24+40Gx2 max, this one is 25Gx16, and its not bad for this price.
But I still dont like missing secodary spare power supply: I see only 1 power socket :C

The Tik can handle LAG quite well on this tier of devices, so you are not entirely without options, depending on the scenario.

Good thing is that QNAP are pushing hard for market share and this will 'wake' the rather conservative MikroTik guys.

MikroTik already have a decent OS and they are skilled in hardware design. It won't be long before we see 'modern' offerings from them.
On the other hand, I wouldn't trust QSS in a mission-critical setups. As you notably mentioned they don't even have PSU redundancy.

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

Here's the problem with this switch... It's NOT 10GBase-T. An affordable 10Gbit switch is aimed at people WITHOUT a lot of money, so what good is it buying this switch when you have to buy expensive transceivers and DACs.... Or if you want to wire your house, you're either stuck doing fiber work, or if you want to use CAT6a, you're then stuck buying a dozen 10GBase-T to SFP transceivers at $70 each. A few years ago, if you wanted 10gig in your home, it might have been cheaper to go with SFP, but that's not the case anymore.... Nothing is cheaper or easier than CAT6a when it comes to installation, 10GBase-T NICs are under $100 brand new, and around $50-$60 used, and 10GBase-T switches are basically the same price as their SFP counterparts. And whatever benefits that SFP offers are negligible, like power consumption in a home with at most two dozen connections... And don't even mention latency unless you're one of those stock traders that use computers to do thousands of trades per second.

I just really don't understand why anyone would go SFP for a whole home network... Maybe for a single room where you can use a DAC to make the connection, but for wiring up a whole home, 10GBase-T is the way to go. That's what I did so maybe I'm biased, haha.

Lol! Where is that? In many countries FTTH is a common thing. Sadly, in other 'developed' countries majority of users are dealing with DSL...

There's a lot of people in the United States who are still dealing with DSL... My aunt for example in New Hampshire, the only option is DSL where she lives, and guess what the speed is.... Think of the worst speed you can think of.... 1.5Mbps...thats the speed of my Aunt's internet, and it's their only option, and the majority of the time it doesn't reach even those speeds. Basically, only one person in the house can watch a YouTube video at a time and NOT at 1080p, and don't even think about Netflix or other streaming services.

The only other option is Hughesnet satellite, which isn't much better, yeah it's faster, but with a 25GB per month data cap, a family would be hitting that wall in a week or less. Luckily, the small town she lives in (600 people) took it upon themselves to build their own network like Chattanooga Tennessee did (publicly owned internet, what a brilliant idea.. Look up Chattanooga, they built their own network and service and basically offer symmetrical Gigabit for less than most people get 100Mbps...but of course the Telecoms bribed politicians to basically make it illegal in that state and others, and even got the government to give companies like Comcast millions to "expand service"... It's so corrupt) and now they're about a month away from launching it with plans for 500Mbps symmetrical starting at $30/month, 750Mbps for $40/month and 1000Mbps for $50/month

What's funny is, I live in the same state, just 50 minutes away, and am currently getting 1200Mbps(1.2 Gbps) for $70/month (on PCs with a Gigabit connection it's 985 Mbps, but anything connected to my 10GBase-T home network gets 1185 Mbps)...it's crazy that less than an hour separates us, but there's a 30 year difference in internet speed and technology (though that's about to change with their town owned network).

If you look it up though, there are countless towns and large areas of states out west like Idaho, Montana, etc that literally, LITERALLY have no internet offered at their location, and it's more common than you'd believe in America. That's why things like starlink are actually a pretty big deal for those people out in Idaho who still have no internet.

 

[zlobby]

Here's the problem with this switch... It's NOT 10GBase-T. An affordable 10Gbit switch is aimed at people WITHOUT a lot of money, so what good is it buying this switch when you have to buy expensive transceivers and DACs.... Or if you want to wire your house, you're either stuck doing fiber work, or if you want to use CAT6a, you're then stuck buying a dozen 10GBase-T to SFP transceivers at $70 each. A few years ago, if you wanted 10gig in your home, it might have been cheaper to go with SFP, but that's not the case anymore.... Nothing is cheaper or easier than CAT6a when it comes to installation, 10GBase-T NICs are under $100 brand new, and around $50-$60 used, and 10GBase-T switches are basically the same price as their SFP counterparts. And whatever benefits that SFP offers are negligible, like power consumption in a home with at most two dozen connections... And don't even mention latency unless you're one of those stock traders that use computers to do thousands of trades per second.

I just really don't understand why anyone would go SFP for a whole home network... Maybe for a single room where you can use a DAC to make the connection, but for wiring up a whole home, 10GBase-T is the way to go. That's what I did so maybe I'm biased, haha.



There's a lot of people in the United States who are still dealing with DSL... My aunt for example in New Hampshire, the only option is DSL where she lives, and guess what the speed is.... Think of the worst speed you can think of.... 1.5Mbps...thats the speed of my Aunt's internet, and it's their only option, and the majority of the time it doesn't reach even those speeds. Basically, only one person in the house can watch a YouTube video at a time and NOT at 1080p, and don't even think about Netflix or other streaming services.

The only other option is Hughesnet satellite, which isn't much better, yeah it's faster, but with a 25GB per month data cap, a family would be hitting that wall in a week or less. Luckily, the small town she lives in (600 people) took it upon themselves to build their own network like Chattanooga Tennessee did (publicly owned internet, what a brilliant idea.. Look up Chattanooga, they built their own network and service and basically offer symmetrical Gigabit for less than most people get 100Mbps...but of course the Telecoms bribed politicians to basically make it illegal in that state and others, and even got the government to give companies like Comcast millions to "expand service"... It's so corrupt) and now they're about a month away from launching it with plans for 500Mbps symmetrical starting at $30/month, 750Mbps for $40/month and 1000Mbps for $50/month

What's funny is, I live in the same state, just 50 minutes away, and am currently getting 1200Mbps(1.2 Gbps) for $70/month (on PCs with a Gigabit connection it's 985 Mbps, but anything connected to my 10GBase-T home network gets 1185 Mbps)...it's crazy that less than an hour separates us, but there's a 30 year difference in internet speed and technology (though that's about to change with their town owned network).

If you look it up though, there are countless towns and large areas of states out west like Idaho, Montana, etc that literally, LITERALLY have no internet offered at their location, and it's more common than you'd believe in America. That's why things like starlink are actually a pretty big deal for those people out in Idaho who still have no internet.

No two demand scenarios are alike. There are needs and there are needs.

As for the dire internet situation, won't ol' Musky's sat internet help you? I thought it's available in the US?

Oh, and each time I hear about Chattanooga, I can't help it but to think of

 

[Blue4130]

Here's the problem with this switch... It's NOT 10GBase-T. An affordable 10Gbit switch is aimed at people WITHOUT a lot of money, so what good is it buying this switch when you have to buy expensive transceivers and DACs.... Or if you want to wire your house, you're either stuck doing fiber work, or if you want to use CAT6a, you're then stuck buying a dozen 10GBase-T to SFP transceivers at $70 each. A few years ago, if you wanted 10gig in your home, it might have been cheaper to go with SFP, but that's not the case anymore.... Nothing is cheaper or easier than CAT6a when it comes to installation, 10GBase-T NICs are under $100 brand new, and around $50-$60 used, and 10GBase-T switches are basically the same price as their SFP counterparts. And whatever benefits that SFP offers are negligible, like power consumption in a home with at most two dozen connections... And don't even mention latency unless you're one of those stock traders that use computers to do thousands of trades per second.

I just really don't understand why anyone would go SFP for a whole home network... Maybe for a single room where you can use a DAC to make the connection, but for wiring up a whole home, 10GBase-T is the way to go. That's what I did so maybe I'm biased, haha.



There's a lot of people in the United States who are still dealing with DSL... My aunt for example in New Hampshire, the only option is DSL where she lives, and guess what the speed is.... Think of the worst speed you can think of.... 1.5Mbps...thats the speed of my Aunt's internet, and it's their only option, and the majority of the time it doesn't reach even those speeds. Basically, only one person in the house can watch a YouTube video at a time and NOT at 1080p, and don't even think about Netflix or other streaming services.

The only other option is Hughesnet satellite, which isn't much better, yeah it's faster, but with a 25GB per month data cap, a family would be hitting that wall in a week or less. Luckily, the small town she lives in (600 people) took it upon themselves to build their own network like Chattanooga Tennessee did (publicly owned internet, what a brilliant idea.. Look up Chattanooga, they built their own network and service and basically offer symmetrical Gigabit for less than most people get 100Mbps...but of course the Telecoms bribed politicians to basically make it illegal in that state and others, and even got the government to give companies like Comcast millions to "expand service"... It's so corrupt) and now they're about a month away from launching it with plans for 500Mbps symmetrical starting at $30/month, 750Mbps for $40/month and 1000Mbps for $50/month

What's funny is, I live in the same state, just 50 minutes away, and am currently getting 1200Mbps(1.2 Gbps) for $70/month (on PCs with a Gigabit connection it's 985 Mbps, but anything connected to my 10GBase-T home network gets 1185 Mbps)...it's crazy that less than an hour separates us, but there's a 30 year difference in internet speed and technology (though that's about to change with their town owned network).

If you look it up though, there are countless towns and large areas of states out west like Idaho, Montana, etc that literally, LITERALLY have no internet offered at their location, and it's more common than you'd believe in America. That's why things like starlink are actually a pretty big deal for those people out in Idaho who still have no internet.

I don't think this is a home switch, I peg it as more of a small business switch. Something for say a local media company, or photo studio or something like that.

25g is a long way from being needed in a home.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

Why does "affordable" sound sarcastic?

 

[TheLostSwede]

Why does "affordable" sound sarcastic?

It is very affordable for what it is. No sarcasm implied.

 

[zlobby]

It is very affordable for what it is. No sarcasm implied.

Some people can easilly afford a private jet, while others can't even afford a proper dinner for their families.

I guess we can all work on our phrasing.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Some people can easilly afford a private jet, while others can't even afford a proper dinner for their families.

I guess we can all work on our phrasing.

Or maybe you could take the content of this site in context of what the site is about?

 

[zlobby]

Or maybe you could take the content of this site in context of what the site is about?

We all do what we all do. So do command the blockchain of spacetime. And it is by our actions that others will judge us.

 

[itguy2003]

How it is managed but still layer 2?

Besides, for that price you'd get a decent MikroTik at leats.

Because you can configure vlans, your spanning tree protocol and 802.1Q

 

[Bearshark]

This conversation has devolved into silliness. Maybe I can bring this back to the topic. Would this switch be an affordable SAN switching solution for my SMB? At a minimum would be buying two of these to do multipathing to support all that hypervisor goodness? Traditional Cluster + QNAP switches + Storage? Or should I spend 20k on two of the big boys (Brocade, Cisco, Qlogic, etc...). Please don't suggest HCI either, I have mixed feelings on that subject.