Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

6509 power issue

All,

I just did a power calculation for 6509 and got the following:

I do not understand why Single/Redundant WS-CAC-3000W has less power usage percentage than Single/Redundant WS-CAC-8700W-E with a Single 220V input or Single/Redundant WS-CAC-6000W with a Single 220V input.

Can anyone please clarify?

Thanks.

Minimum Power Supply
Single/Redundant WS-CAC-8700W-E with a Single 220V input93.8861.2757.523.75
Other Power Supply Options
Single/Redundant WS-CAC-6000W with a Single 220V input90.4163.6257.526.10
Single/Redundant WS-CAC-3000W87.1865.9857.528.46
Single/Redundant WS-CAC-4000W63.6690.3657.5232.84
Combined WS-CAC-2500W62.1892.5057.5234.98
Combined WS-CAC-8700W-E with a Single 220V input56.22102.3257.5244.80
Combined WS-CAC-6000W with a Single 220V input54.25106.0357.5248.51
Combined WS-CAC-3000W52.31109.9757.5252.45
Single/Redundant WS-CAC-8700W-E with a Dual 220V input43.34132.7157.5275.19
Single/Redundant WS-CAC-6000W with Dual 220V inputs41.86137.4257.5279.90
Combined WS-CAC-4000W38.19150.6057.5293.08
Single/Redundant WS-CAC-8700W-E with a Triple 220V input28.51201.7657.52144.24
Combined WS-CAC-8700W-E with a Dual 220V input25.95221.6357.52164.11
Combined WS-CAC-6000W with Dual 220V inputs25.11229.0357.52171.51
Combined WS-CAC-8700W-E with a Triple 220V input17.07336.9457.52279.42
527
Views
0
Helpful
0
Replies
CreatePlease login to create content