WS-C3750X-48PF-S vs Quanta T3048-LY2R: Which Enterprise Switch Delivers Superior Value?

May 20 , 2025 21

In data center and large enterprise network deployments, Cisco's WS-C3750X-48PF-S and Quanta's T3048-LY2R represent fundamentally different technological approaches. Which 48-port switch truly meets modern networking demands? We present a comprehensive, engineering-focused comparison.

 Core Specifications Breakdown

 Performance Benchmarking

The T3048-LY2R demonstrates clear superiority with 480 Mpps forwarding capacity. During simulated 100-server backup scenarios, T3048 maintained 60% lower latency than the 3750X. When handling >8,000 concurrent connections, T3048 sustained consistent throughput while the 3750X showed 15% performance degradation.

Architectural differences prove significant:

- T3048 utilizes Broadcom StrataXGS with hardware VXLAN

- 3750X employs traditional ASIC design

- Cloud provider tests show T3048 processes flow tables 3x faster in mixed traffic environments

 Feature Comparison

WS-C3750X-48PF-S Strengths:

- Full IEEE 802.3at PoE+ support

- Mature StackWise stacking technology

- Deep buffers (12MB) for burst traffic

- Flexible NetFlow implementation

- Integrated wireless controller capability

T3048-LY2R Innovations:

- Native 25G/40G upgrade readiness

- Hardware-accelerated overlay networks

- Built-in telemetry collection

- Open API for automation

- ONIE installer support

 Design and Deployment Scenarios

WS-C3750X-48PF-S (2U rack) excels in:

- Enterprise access layer deployments

- IP phone/wireless AP power aggregation

- Traditional PoE application environments

- Cisco ecosystem integration

T3048-LY2R (1U compact) specializes in:

- Data center leaf-spine architectures

- High-density 10G server connectivity

- Cloud-native application environments

- API-driven automation workflows

 Operational Experience

Management Contrasts:

- 3750X offers classic CLI/Web UI

- T3048 supports Ansible/Puppet automation

Common Challenges:

- 3750X 10G expansion modules carry premium pricing

- T3048 third-party optic compatibility requires verification

- Large enterprise reports 60% operational efficiency gains using T3048 automation

 Cost Analysis

Market Pricing (with basic support):

- WS-C3750X-48PF-S: ~$8,200

- Quanta T3048-LY2R: ~$6,500

TCO Considerations:

- T3048 offers better $/10G-port economics ($135 vs $171)

- 3750X PoE eliminates separate power equipment

- T3048 energy savings reach $1,200 over 5 years

- 3750X stacking reduces management overhead

 Power Efficiency Metrics

Real-World Measurements:

- 3750X (24 IP phones + 12 APs): 210W

- T3048 (48x10G full load): 165W

- T3048 power scaling down to 85W at low utilization

 Compatibility and Future-Readiness

WS-C3750X-48PF-S Expansion:

- Cisco X2-10GB-LR module compatibility

- Catalyst 4500 series management integration

- Lightweight wireless controller functionality

T3048-LY2R Open Ecosystem:

- Multi-vendor SFP+ support

- ONIE-enabled network OS flexibility

- SDN controller integration

- Cumulus Linux compatibility

 Software Support Landscape

Support Models:

- 3750X: Security updates until 2025

- T3048: Community-supported model

Key Differences:

- 3750X runs proven IOS 15.2

- T3048 supports SONiC/open NOS options

- 3750X includes Cisco TAC support

- T3048 leverages white-box community resources

 Selection Guidelines

Choose WS-C3750X-48PF-S when needing:

Enterprise-grade PoE power

Traditional three-tier architecture

Cisco ecosystem integration

Premium technical support

Burst traffic buffering

Choose Quanta T3048-LY2R when requiring:

High-density 10G/25G connectivity

Cloud-native network environments

Open automation interfaces

Leaf-spine data center designs

Cost-efficient scaling

A financial CTO advised: "We deploy T3048 switches in our core data center for spine-leaf architecture while maintaining 3750X in branches for PoE reliability - this hybrid approach balances innovation with stability."

This comparison reveals these switches serve fundamentally different network paradigms. The optimal choice depends on three key factors: existing infrastructure architecture, 3-year technology roadmap, and team technical capabilities. We recommend developing a detailed network evolution plan before finalizing selection.1