Cisco Catalyst 8300 vs Catalyst 8500
These are two roles in the same family: the Catalyst 8300 is a modular branch/edge router, while the Catalyst 8500 is an ASIC-based aggregation and headend platform. Choose the 8300 for branch and edge sites up to roughly 18 Gbps CEF; choose the 8500 for regional aggregation and SD-WAN headend needing tens of gigabits of encrypted throughput.
Cisco Catalyst 8300
Modular IOS XE branch and edge router with NIM/SM-X/PIM slots and SD-WAN/SASE built in.
- CEF up to ~18.8 Gbps, IPsec up to ~8.6 Gbps
- Flexible NIM, SM-X, and PIM module slots
- 1RU and 2RU chassis options
- x86 multi-core with container hosting
Cisco Catalyst 8500
ASIC-based aggregation and headend platform for high-scale SD-WAN and WAN edge.
- C8500-12X: ~40 Gbps SD-WAN / ~118 Gbps forwarding
- C8500-12X4QC: ~68 Gbps SD-WAN / ~197 Gbps forwarding
- Custom-built ASICs for headend/aggregation scale
- Fixed high-density 10G (and 40/100G on 12X4QC)
Cisco Catalyst 8300 vs Cisco Catalyst 8500: spec comparison
| Spec | Cisco Catalyst 8300 | Cisco Catalyst 8500 |
|---|---|---|
| Role | Branch / edge router | Aggregation / headend platform |
| Forwarding architecture | x86 multi-core with crypto offload | Custom-built ASIC |
| CEF / forwarding throughput | Up to ~18.8 Gbps | ~118 Gbps (12X) to ~197 Gbps (12X4QC) |
| SD-WAN throughput | Branch-scale (gigabits) | Up to ~40 Gbps (12X) / ~68 Gbps (12X4QC) |
| IPsec throughput | Up to ~8.6 Gbps | Tens of gigabits, ASIC-accelerated |
| Modularity | Modular (NIM, SM-X, PIM) | Fixed high-density interfaces |
| Form factor | 1RU or 2RU | 1RU |
| Container / app hosting | Yes | Limited (purpose-built for forwarding) |
| SD-WAN / SASE | Native | Native |
| Software | Cisco IOS XE | Cisco IOS XE |
Choose Cisco Catalyst 8300 if
Choose the Catalyst 8300 for branch and edge sites that need modular interface flexibility, application hosting, and up to roughly 18 Gbps CEF with gigabit-class IPsec. It is the right tool for medium-to-large branches and lighter regional roles.
Choose Cisco Catalyst 8500 if
Choose the Catalyst 8500 for regional aggregation, data center WAN edge, or SD-WAN headend where you need tens of gigabits of encrypted throughput and 100G-class forwarding from purpose-built ASICs.
Verdict
Both run IOS XE with native SD-WAN/SASE, so pick by role, not preference. The 8300 is the modular branch/edge workhorse with app hosting; the 8500 is the ASIC-based aggregation and headend engine for high-scale encrypted throughput. Many networks deploy both: 8300s at branches feeding 8500s at the headend.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between the Catalyst 8300 and 8500?
The 8300 is a modular x86-based branch/edge router (up to ~18.8 Gbps CEF), while the 8500 is an ASIC-based aggregation and headend platform reaching ~118-197 Gbps forwarding and tens of gigabits of SD-WAN throughput.
Is the Catalyst 8500 modular like the 8300?
No. The 8500 uses fixed high-density interfaces optimized for forwarding, whereas the 8300 offers modular NIM, SM-X, and PIM slots plus application hosting for branch flexibility.
Can I mix Catalyst 8300 and 8500 in one SD-WAN fabric?
Yes, and it is common. Deploy Catalyst 8300s at branches and Catalyst 8500s as the SD-WAN headend or regional aggregation, all managed under the same IOS XE SD-WAN fabric.
Which is better for SD-WAN headend, 8300 or 8500?
The 8500. Its ASICs deliver the tens-of-gigabits encrypted throughput and high forwarding capacity that headend and aggregation sites need, well beyond the 8300's branch-scale limits.
More Routing comparisons
Specs are for planning and may change; Uniqcli confirms the current Cisco bill of materials and pricing on your quote. Cisco, Catalyst, Nexus, Meraki, and Firepower are trademarks of Cisco Systems, Inc.; Uniqcli LLC is an independent authorized Cisco partner.