In modern equipment testing, the focus is on the connection between a power supply's output specifications and its actual performance.

The specific power output specifications mentioned in the article are indeed worthy of in-depth study based on the power and temperature data under different network port access conditions.

The power output specification is 53.5V/2A.

When the measured air interface standby power is 6.2W, this is a basic power condition.

As the number of 2.5G network ports increases, the power gradually increases.

When two 2.5G network ports are inserted, the power increases to 8.1W; with four network ports, the power increases to 9.9W; with six network ports, the power reaches 11.7W. This growth pattern clearly shows the significant impact of increasing the number of network ports on power.

This is an important data reflection of equipment energy consumption in actual usage scenarios.

In different application scenarios, power consumption will also be different.

If four AP panels are connected at will, the overall power consumption of the device will rise to 32 watts. Compared with the previous power when only the network port is connected, this shows that connecting to the AP will consume more power.

Then look at the temperature.

After installing six 2.5G network ports, place it at room temperature of 22 degrees Celsius for two hours. The highest temperature measured was 33.2 degrees, and there was no obvious heat on the touch panel.

Then connect four panel APs the next day, and the maximum temperature is 37 degrees in a room temperature of 25 degrees.

Users can use this data to clearly understand the heating status of the equipment under various loads and different ambient temperatures.

Different temperatures have an impact on the life and performance stability of the equipment.

In practical applications, excessively high temperatures may cause problems such as reduced device speed. However, this test showed that the device's temperature control performed well. This shows that the heat dissipation design of the equipment is reasonable to a certain extent.

The internal chip structure of the device is important.

There are two 2.5G Ethernet chips installed under the CPU. From the circuit diagram, these two chips are connected to two WAN ports respectively and are also connected to the CPU.

The other eight 2.5G network ports are managed by two different chips, one of which also integrates four additional 2.5G physical layer transceivers.

This layout method realizes the function setting of 10 2.5G network ports.

Further observation shows that factors such as the connection method between chips and the number of network ports they manage jointly determine the network expansion capabilities of the device.

While some switches, such as 4 plus 2 or 5 plus 1 models, use a single-chip design, this device uses a unique chip layout to achieve its unique features.

There is a difference between -AC and -EN layouts here.

The second significant difference between the two is that the main source of heat and power consumption has changed. A low-power design chip is used, which integrates the 2.5G PHY function, and the cost has also dropped.

In -AC, it was originally a plan that was overqualified.

When AC was first launched, the 2.5G configuration could only be based on the plan at that time, but now the EN version has shown significant progress, both in terms of heat generation and power consumption. This change is fully reflected Product updates brought about by technological development.

The CPU model is divided into AC and EN versions. The AC version uses a specific model, while the EN version uses a different model.

The difference between the final T logo and the U logo does not require too much attention, however, this difference will have an impact on their overall performance.

Different CPU models are an important symbol to distinguish different performance levels of products.

This CPU model is different from the memory type identification. During use, the device processing speed, multi-tasking capabilities, etc. will be different. For example, they react differently when dealing with complex network traffic.

Finally, let’s talk about the small packet forwarding performance of the EN version.

Through certain tests, the device can fully utilize the uplink and downlink capabilities of the 2.5G port. When the data traffic exceeds 10,000, its small packet forwarding capability even surpasses Qualcomm. This performance is particularly significant.

This kind of excellent performance has become a key advantage of the equipment in the market competition at a time when information technology is rapidly advancing and network data traffic is changing and complex.

In enterprise network configurations or high-end home network architectures, excellent packet forwarding capabilities are crucial, as they help ensure fast and stable data transmission.

Do you have any similar experience testing equipment performance?