Best 32-port switch to replace Netgear Prosafe 24prt 10/100

[computron9000]

Got a possibly dying Netgear Prosafe 24-port switch (lightening strike). Lost 2 ports somehow afterwards (several other switches and other unrelated hardware had to be replaced at a building after the strike).

Trying to find the best 32-port switch to replace it for under $400. Don't need anything fancy, just a nice a nice replacement. There are no servers, no computer to computer traffic really. Pretty much just connects 23 computers to a $200 linksys router so they can access the Internet. Figured it'd make sense to bump up to a 32-port for expandability, and don't want to risk using a faulty switch ongoing.

Newegg has this at $309:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6833122082

That seem like a good option? Hoping someone with more experience in this department could chime in with some thoughts.

Eventually I'd like to hook up a small server or something to it (or at a bare minimum a basic networked drive somewhere I can dump files on for sort of a super-cheap backup solution for about 3 or 4 of the computers). If we could tie that in to the switch upgrade that'd be awesome, if not, not a big deal. My hands are tied in many ways in what I can do and/or what I can spend, but I have some flexibility (the reasons aren't important, but basically corporate IT policy overrides local building policy, and corporate pretty much mandates standalone computers with generic passwords (I know, right?)). Basically, I'm trying to replace the switch as priority #1. The optional thing would be if I could somehow tie this in with a super-budget backup for say, 2GB of data from 4 of the 23 computer.

Thanks for any help or thoughts.

Edit: Cleaned up my thoughts above. Also, 1000mbps is pretty much completely irrelevant, most are cheap boxes with 10/100 cards anway. A +1 or +2 1000mbps wouldn't hurt if I setup a backup system of some kind, but that traffic would all be at night, not during the day. Even if I setup a shared drive for files, we'd be talking a maximum of 500MB / day of total traffic, spread around the whole day.

[notfred]

That switch has all kinds of enterprise features you don't need like VLANs and IGMP snooping. I know you don't have GigE currently but I would put a GigE switch in now as everything you buy in future will be GigE. It will also make a huge difference if you start moving files around in your basic server scenario.

I have 3 of the 8 port baby brother of http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... =dgs-1024d scattered throughout my house and they have been rock solid for something like 3 years. At that price you can buy 2 for future expansion and still be cheaper than what you were looking at.

[videobits]

I wouldn't discount the gigabit speed at this point in time. Now that is pretty much standard on even the cheapest of systems. You may not have them now, but will likely before the switch's useful life is over (barring lightning strikes and that couldn't happen twice, right?).

Price seems to go up fast as you get to higher port counts. What I'd suggest is a 24 port gigabit switch plus a 8 port or 16 port switch. You should be able to stay in your budget. And you get TWO switches so if you do suffer a problem you can at least have some of your systems connected and working.

A couple suggestions to start with:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6833122058

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6833122404

That's my couple cents on the subject.

Good luck

[computron9000]

Thanks for the comments. I considered adding an 8 port switch off a 24port replacement, but why muck around if you have the money for 32-ports?

Isn't it more sensible to just get a single point of failure rather than have a 24-port switch in a rack setting next to an 8-port one on a shelf? 23 cables plug in. Why not have 23 of them plug into a 32-port rack-mounted switch. with 9 holes available. Why would you buy two smaller switches like that, if you could afford a single one?

The traffic will not escalate beyond a few hundred megabytes a day, unless backups are included, and they make switches with 10/100 ports and a couple +1000 ports, which a server could be plugged into.

Maybe I'm asking in the wrong questions... am I insane for even questioning myself for the fact a $300 switch could solve this issue? Obviously replacing the NetGear Prosafe 24 port 10/100 switch is easy. It just seems like there's a better option out there with 32-ports for under $400. I don't like to add extra hardware, extra plugs, extra-troubleshooting to things.

My initial thought would be a direct rack-mounted replacement for $309 giving 32-ports.

[Bensam123]

Just sounds like you want someone to give some advice who has been in the same area as you. My brother works for a small size company, but they have around 48 PoS terminals hooked into a network. They originally had a couple switches hooked together, but he ended up replacing them after a lightning strike too. The strike took out a couple of the ports and they functioned alright even though they were missing. For some reason stringing together a few cheap switches has reliability issues too. It could've been the brand or the switches themselves.

Either way, when you start getting into the high end stuff you run into managed switches and what not you really don't need unless you find yourself making vlans and subnetting out your network as other people have said here.

However, the company he was working for had the money and they wanted the best so he ended up buying some Cisco switches, which are pricey, but they are quite reliable. I would consider getting a gigabit switch. If you really want uplinks and you're that entwitterpaited with the concept, you want a switch with modules for SC fiber and look around for 10/100gbit modules. 10/100 switches with 1gbit uplinks aren't really standard anymore as gbit has become quite common place. The only reason they do configurations like that still is for product segmentation.

You're unfortunately in a tight spot, you could get away with a 24 port switch like someone else was saying for a lot cheaper because that's where it scales down from 'enterprise' stuff. You're going to pay out the bum if you really want a 32 port switch. Looking at Newegg and your price range, that looks like about it for your choices.

So I guess it really comes down to if you really want a all in one switch cause it looks snazzy or you're willing to buy a substantially cheaper 24 port gigabit switch and add a extra one if you need to expand, such as this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6833122058

Alternatively, you can spend a extra 200 to get a 32 port switch with gigabit.

[notfred]

Those D-Link 24 port rack mount GigE switches that I linked to above are $140 with free shipping plus there is an additional $20 coupon for today. You can buy 2 of them for 46 ports for less than the 32 port switch that you are looking at, heck buy a third as a spare to keep in case of future lightning strikes frying stuff for not much more than you are looking at for the 32 port switch. If you have 2 switches then if one does get fried then you can get the most important stuff going again by moving it across to the working switch. If you've bought the third then you can just plug and go for your disaster recovery plan.

I know you don't see the need for GigE now, but it really is the standard and you want to be investment protected as these switches should last years. I wouldn't worry about just connecting 2 switches together, more than that or heavy traffic between them is where you want to start being careful and looking for managed switches with STP, link bundling, 10GE uplinks etc. Managed switches add more things to go wrong and more complexity - e.g. in Cisco language you would want to configure "spanning-tree portfast" on each port so that they work straight away and don't go in to STP blocking mode initially when the PCs are booted - potentially confusing fast booting PCs over their network connectivity, but then if you later add other switches you then have to change the configuration on those ports and make sure nobody ever plugs the wrong wire in to the wrong port.

[just brew it!]

Yeah, I think I'm gonna have to agree with notfred here. Given that the *primary* use of this network is Internet access, splitting things across two switches isn't going to hurt performance at all for the typical use case. But once you add the backup server, you'll be able to take advantage of gigabit access to the server on any machines that have gigabit capability (any hard drive made in the past decade is capable of completely saturating a 100 mbit network).

[computron9000]

i'm convinced. thanks for the feedback. i'll let you guys know how it goes.