Any real reason to pick 5100 over 6100?
-
The 5100 and 6100 are listed at the same price, but the 6100 is newer and more powerful.
Any reason to opt for the 5100? More stable?
Thanks,
Pete -
@cabledude
Look (just look) at the 6100 and the 5100 : the 5100 is more user fool proof, as the ports are easier to understand.Also, if you prefer black over white ....
The price performance ratio makes you take the 6100 of course.
The "5100" shows a :
Storage: 8 GB eMMC Flash onboard (upgradable)where the 6100 is , as recent forum posts show "probably upgradable" as the on board drive is a more exotic one.
Btw : I'm using neither of them, so take my observations as they are.
-
@gertjan said in Any real reason to pick 5100 over 6100?:
here the 6100 is , as recent forum posts show "probably upgradable" as the on board drive is a more exotic one.
Btw : I'm using neither of them, so take my observations as they are.It would be the 6100 for me, 1, 2.5, and 10 GbE Network Interfaces rather than 1 GbE for the same price and better IPERF3 results.
Also has support for SFP & SFP+ interfaces.
I'd also rather see a black version & a rack mount kit.
I also don't own either.
Andy
1 x Netgate SG-4860 - 3 x Linksys LGS308P - 1 x Aruba InstantOn AP22
-
@nogbadthebad said in Any real reason to pick 5100 over 6100?:
It would be the 6100 for me, 1, 2.5, and 10 GbE Network Interfaces rather than 1 GbE for the same price and better IPERF3 results.
I cables the office ( and home ) ones, and was happy with a stellar 1 Giga bit connection on the local side, while my WAN is (still today) a small 20 Mega bit connection.
Fiber is in front of the door, but it will not go over 500 Mbis or so - or I have to triple that connection ( no need).So, yes, those are big numbers, and maybe normal some where in the future. But when I look outside, and see miles ans miles of forest, cows and many centries old houses, I think that the ++Giga bit connection is - for me - not next year.
I'll have another router by that time ;)@nogbadthebad said in Any real reason to pick 5100 over 6100?:
Also has support for SFP & SFP+ interfaces.
That' the one I dream about : ISP fibre direct into pfSense using some SFP thing.
The reality is that pfSEnse needs to "speak" the "ISP DHCP version" to negotiate a connection. The Dutch version of pfSense, to name it without naming it - managed to do so, and this isn't a easy solution. That choice is a no go for me. -
Availability.
If the 5100 gives you what you need and it's in stock but the 6100 is backordered, then the 5100 is my choice. in fact I went through that same thought process and have a 5100.Now if the 5100 does not have what you need but the 6100 does and you can afford to wait if its on backorder, then order the 6100.
-
I spoke too soon:-
https://shop.racknex.com/produkt/netgate-6100-rackmount-kit-19-zoll/
-
@nogbadthebad That's interesting. It's also the advantage of trying to use industry standard form factors :)
-
@mer said in Any real reason to pick 5100 over 6100?:
Availability.
If the 5100 gives you what you need and it's in stock but the 6100 is backordered, then the 5100 is my choice.I could order either one today for the same price
@gertjan said in Any real reason to pick 5100 over 6100?:
@nogbadthebad said in Any real reason to pick 5100 over 6100?:
It would be the 6100 for me, 1, 2.5, and 10 GbE Network Interfaces rather than 1 GbE for the same price and better IPERF3 results.
Fiber is in front of the door, but it will not go over 500 Mbis or so - or I have to triple that connection ( no need).
[...]
I'll have another router by that time ;)I have similar thoughts. I do have plans for a high speed (500-ish) remote access VPN so I can get to my stuff from wherever I like. It's just that there aren't many places I go (as of yet) that offer such speeds to me. But that will become more common.
@nogbadthebad said in Any real reason to pick 5100 over 6100?:
Also has support for SFP & SFP+ interfaces.
That' the one I dream about : ISP fibre direct into pfSense using some SFP thing.
The reality is that pfSEnse needs to "speak" the "ISP DHCP version" to negotiate a connection. The Dutch version of pfSense, to name it without naming it - managed to do so, and this isn't a easy solution. That choice is a no go for me.I have seen reports here that do get single stream going with direct SFP port in pfSense. But even with the SFP -> RJ45 conversion the fiber max speeds, reliability and stability are excellent.
-
Another consideration I have to go higher tier Netgate than 3100 is that I've read more than a couple of topics where some 3100's seem to struggle with the recent pfSense + upgrades, probably depending on config and packages installed. Though as far as firewall and VPN performance go, the 3100 would probably be fine for at least a couple of years.
I have seen close to none of those reports about the Intel Netgate boxes. Therefore, even if I don't absolutely need the performance today, I am drawn to the 5100/6100. This is probably a weak argument, I admit.
Also, with so few 6100's yet in customers hands, especially compared to 3100's and even 5100's, I am interested to see if this new model has many teething problems. So I will stay put with my SG-1100 for a while i think...
Pete
-
@cabledude The 3100 had some recent issues. Those were resolved in 21.05.01. However the 3100 is end-of-sale so they will be hard to find. As far as performance though we have maybe ten or so in service at various clients and one in our office and no issues.
-
@steveits said in Any real reason to pick 5100 over 6100?:
@cabledude The 3100 had some recent issues. Those were resolved in 21.05.01. However the 3100 is end-of-sale so they will be hard to find. As far as performance though we have maybe ten or so in service at various clients and one in our office and no issues.
Does that mean a SG-3100 replacement is imminent?
-
@keyser said in Any real reason to pick 5100 over 6100?:
Does that mean a SG-3100 replacement is imminent?
Don't know. It seems likely there would be something eventually since there is a bit of a gap from a 2100 to a 6100.
