Packetshaper 7500 vs 3500 vs 1700
Packeteer • PacketShaper • PacketShaper 7500 • PacketShaper 3500 • PacketShaper 1700
If you are shopping for a Packetshaper to support 45M of bandwidth, you have three options to choose from: Packetshaper 7500, 3500 or 1700. Learn the key differences so you can make the right choice.
Let’s review some of specs on each of these:
Packetshaper 7500
- IP Flows: 300,000
- Classes: 1024
- Shaping Throughput: 200 Mbps
- Active Compression Tunnels: 100
Packetshaper 3500
- IP Flows: 60,000
- Classes: 512
- Shaping Throughput: 45Mbps
- Active Compression Tunnels: 30
Packetshaper 1700
- IP Flows: 45,000
- Classes: 512
- Shaping Throughput: 45Mbps
- Active Tunnels: 15
The 7500 is designed for data centers that now need or will need to shape up to 200Mbps of traffic, will be using several smaller compression-enabled Packetshapers at branch locations or have enough hosts to require far more IP flows or classes than either the 3500 or 1700 can handle.
The differences between the 3500 and the 1700 are more subtle. The IP Flows are nearly the same, but the 3500 can handle twice the amount of compression tunnels. This means it would be ideal to use at a smaller data center with several smaller units at branch locations with compression enabled. Both have gigabit interfaces and could potentially be used at small datacenters, but the clincher for the 3500 is it’s ability to look at multiple LANs with the help of LAN Expansion Modules (LEM). LEM cards give a Packetshaper multiple interfaces to look at multiple networks on the same unit. The 3500 supports up to two additional LEM cards, while the 1700 supports none (it does have an out-of-band management port). The 3500 is a 2U box and the 1700 is 1U.
If you see yourself needing to shape multiple LANs (your network and a DMZ perhaps) and you have less than 45Mbps of traffic, then the 3500 is your best bet. Otherwise, you are safe with a 1700.
