When selecting between Cisco's ISR 4000 series routers, the ISR4431/K9 and ISR4331/K9 present distinct advantages for different business needs. This comprehensive comparison examines seven critical aspects to help network architects make an informed decision.
Feature | ISR4431/K9 | ISR4331/K9 |
---|---|---|
Processor | Quad-core 2.5 GHz | Quad-core 1.8 GHz |
System Memory | 16 GB DDR4 | 8 GB DDR4 |
Storage | 120 GB SSD | 60 GB SSD |
Throughput Capacity | 5 Gbps | 3 Gbps |
Concurrent Sessions | 2 Million | 1 Million |
Power Consumption | 75W (typical) | 55W (typical) |
Service Module Slots | 2 | 1 |
The ISR4431/K9 demonstrates clear superiority in processing power, memory capacity, and expansion capabilities, making it better suited for large-scale deployments.
ISR4431/K9 Advantages:
Handles 2x more VPN tunnels (5,000 vs 2,500)
Supports higher density VoIP deployments
Processes complex QoS policies without degradation
ISR4331/K9 Strengths:
Adequate for medium-sized branch offices
Sufficient for basic SD-WAN implementations
Cost-effective for standard routing needs
Both models include:
Integrated threat defense
Cisco Umbrella integration
MACsec encryption
ISR4431/K9 Exclusives:
Hardware-accelerated crypto
FIPS 140-2 validated encryption
Higher IPSec throughput (2 Gbps vs 1 Gbps)
Chassis Construction:
ISR4431/K9:
2RU rack-mountable form factor
Redundant power supply capable
Front-accessible service modules
ISR4331/K9:
1RU compact design
Single power supply
Space-efficient for smaller racks
Operational Considerations:
Noise levels: ISR4431/K9 has louder cooling fans
Installation: ISR4331/K9 easier for space-constrained locations
Expandability: ISR4431/K9 offers better long-term growth potential
Administration:
Both run IOS-XE with identical CLI
Same web interface and API access
Similar monitoring capabilities
Performance in Production:
ISR4431/K9 Handles:
500+ concurrent users comfortably
Multiple HD video conferences
Complex firewall rule sets
ISR4331/K9 Best For:
100-200 typical enterprise users
Standard security policies
Single-site SD-WAN implementations
Real-World Testing Notes:
ISR4431/K9 maintains sub-1ms latency under heavy load
ISR4331/K9 shows 3-5ms latency during peak usage
Purchase Price:
ISR4331/K9: 6,000−8,000
ISR4431/K9: 10,000−13,000
Operational Costs:
Power difference: ~$50/year
ISR4431/K9 requires more rack space
Both use standard SFPs
Five-Year TCO Considerations:
ISR4431/K9 offers better scalability
ISR4331/K9 may require earlier refresh
Support contracts similar
Energy Consumption:
Idle state:
ISR4331/K9: 40W
ISR4431/K9: 55W
Maximum load:
ISR4331/K9: 85W
ISR4431/K9: 120W
Power Options:
Both support:
AC and DC power inputs
Power monitoring
Energy-efficient Ethernet
Third-Party Ecosystem:
Both support:
Standard SNMP monitoring
NetFlow v9
RESTCONF/YANG
Unique ISR4431/K9 Advantages:
Cisco SD-Access ready
ACI integration
Service module compatibility
Virtualization Support:
ISR4431/K9 handles more CSR instances
Both support IWAN and SD-WAN
Current IOS-XE Features:
ISR4431/K9 gets premium features first
ISR4331/K9 receives stable releases
Security Updates:
Both receive 5+ years of patches
ISR4431/K9 gets additional crypto updates
Future-Proofing:
ISR4431/K9 will support newer protocols longer
ISR4331/K9 may miss some advanced features
Choose ISR4331/K9 When:
Supporting medium branch offices
Budget under $10,000 required
Basic SD-WAN needs
No plans for significant growth
Choose ISR4431/K9 When:
Running enterprise core routing
Future expansion anticipated
Advanced security needed
Can justify price premium
Decision Factors:
Current and projected user count
Application performance requirements
Security compliance needs
Available rack space and power
For most growing enterprises, the ISR4431/K9's superior capabilities justify its higher cost when considering long-term operational needs. However, regional offices with stable requirements may find the ISR4331/K9 adequately meets their needs at a lower price point.
Implementation Tip: Run Cisco's Performance Advisor tool to simulate your specific traffic patterns before finalizing your decision. The performance difference between these models becomes most apparent during peak utilization periods.