RV130 vs ERL

[Hanila]

Hi,

I'm looking for a router to replace my ISP's. (I'm in France)
I need a fast NAT throughput, because I have a 500Mbps WAN input, and 200Mbps output.
I saw the ERL, which is really popular, but it only have 3 ethernet ports, and I really need the Cisco's 4. (Or I'll have to buy a switch)

I haven't seen a lot of reviews concerning the RV130, that's why I'm posting here.
Do someone has an opinion about that ?

 

[thiggins]

Many routers support 500 Mbps+ routing throughput with static or DHCP WAN. Cisco seems to have lost the forumula on the RV series.
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tools/charts/router/view

 

[Trip]

I'm assuming you'll be running these without much packet processing or encryption running? If that's the case, then either aught to be fine, as well as many consumer models (as Tim suggested).

That said, unless having the extra switch port located off-box represents a real issue for your topology, I wouldn't let built-in port count dissuade you -- an ERL plus a 5 or 8-port unmanaged switch should be less than or equal to the cost of an RV130, and you'd come out ahead on processing power and switching capacity. Alternatively, you could opt for the ERL-PoE 5, which would give you two additional built-in ports, a faster backplane and integrated PoE (as its name implies). I might also suggest MikroTik but in this case your target throughput puts them at a price premium most likely.

 

[Hanila]

Well, thanks for your answers

I've tried the emulated GUI of the RV130, and it's not possible to tag a VLAN on the WAN interface...
http://www.cisco.com/assets/sol/sb/...0W_Emulator_v1-0-1-3_20140807/default-asp.htm

So I guess it'll be the ERL3 with an additional gigabit switch (about 40€), for a total of 140€
(I've foud a local seller in my city, they have all the edgerouters, and the ERL3 is 99€)