Cisco RV260 vs RV340 Routers

[coxhaus]

I need to buy a new router for another site. Should I buy the Cisco RV260 over the RV340 router? Anybody used both?

 

[Trip]

Haven't used the 260 yet, but here's the comparison matrix for the RV's.

• NAT: 800 vs 980 Mb/s
• Sessions: 25,000 vs 40,000
• IPSEC: 75Mb/s vs 650 Mb/s (that suggests hardware-offload on the 340 but not the 260)
• Tunnels: 20 max vs 50 max
• Interfaces: 260: 1 SFP WAN, 1GB WAN, 1 USB, 8 Gb LAN; 340: 2GB WAN, 2 USB, 4 GB LAN

I'd say if the numbers fit and VPN isn't needed or only needs light throughput (RDP, etc.) you're good to go with the 260. Plus it's 2+ years or so newer, so a bit longer support (probably).

I'm interested to see if Cisco comes out with a 1Gb+ NAT successor to the RV3__ series -- an RV4__ series perhaps? Would be awesome if they chucked some high-clock ARM or MIPS in there.

 

[coxhaus]

Yes I don't know why anybody would build a router now days that did not have gig capability. So the Cisco 260 is a no for me.

 

[System Error Message]

i would avoid both due to the fact that they are based on outdated platforms, however as long as it comes with better hardware than the ubiquiti ERL. I shall use that as the minimum ,as long as its better. All RV/VPN routers use the same CPU type and that platform is outdated now that we have better MIPS and ARM CPUs in the mix around the same level.


The cisco RV is a VPN router, you will see a similar naming scheme across brands. This was for a time when you wanted to use your router for VPN which back then other routers had limited support. Nowadays consumer routers have plenty of support for this feature.

Sadly i do not have a cisco RV with me to test if it is vulnerable to my USB-C adapter, but if you're curious, i have a ugreen 3 port usb-3 with gigabit rj45 ethernet usb-c adapter with usb-c charging port. Now if you plug the ethernet port from this to a network that doesnt use a proper router (like mikrotik), and it brings down the internet, then its the wrong router to use.

@Trip @coxhaus please test this. It definitely brings down tp link and dlink routers and can take up to an hour.

 

[Trip]

i would avoid both due to the fact that they are based on outdated platforms [...] All RV/VPN routers use the same CPU type and that platform is outdated now that we have better MIPS and ARM CPUs in the mix around the same level.

To add info, the RV34_ is based on the NXP QorIQ LS1024A, 900Mhz ARM A9 dual-core chip. When comparing to the RV32_'s rather anemic 300Mhz Caviums, it's quite a step ahead, but yes, in the grand scheme of things, starting to lag way behind equal-cock MIPS variants and more evolved A7/15 and A53/57 ARM chips. One of the several reasons why I prefer to run UBNT, MikroTik and/or x86 embedded over the RVs in general.

@System Error Message - I don't have an RV260 or 340 on me right now to test, but I may be ripping a 345 out soon enough and will test then.

 

[coxhaus]

Yes let us know. I don't use USB for anything other than to reimage a PC or to run a mouse and keyboard.

 

[System Error Message]

Yes let us know. I don't use USB for anything other than to reimage a PC or to run a mouse and keyboard.

ah, usb-c is getting common and lack of an ethernet port.
We live in the age of dongles, both dongles i have work terribly on a network of tp link dumb switches and routers, but work well on my own network of mikrotik and asus (as switch/wifi)