WRV200 vs BEFVP41

Discussion in 'Cisco Small Business Routers and VPN Solutions' started by Sfor, Jan 6, 2008.

  1. Sfor

    Sfor Network Guru Member

    I'm trying to compare WRV200 and BEFVP41 routers. I do not use the wireless, so I'm interested in the wired functions, only.

    The both routers do have some sort of a hardware security acceleration. According to the Linksys the WRV200 can go up to 30Mbit with 3DES encryption. But, I was not able to find anything about the BEFVP41 VPN performance.

    The WRV200 can handle up to 4 IPSec VPN tunnels. According to the BEFVP41 info page it can support up to 50 tunnels. So, the difference seems to be a significant one.

    WRV200 does support QOS and VLAN, while BEFVP41 doesn't.

    Both devices are equal in the type and amount of LAN and WAN ports.

    WRV200 firmware is GPL based (in theory), while the BEFVP seems not to have a GPL firmware inside.

    The case of the WRV200 is poorly designed. The lights are not bright and are visible from a narrow angle, only. I had no opportunity to make such observations with BEFVP41, but the older Linksys case designs are seeming to be much better.

    The WRV200 was designed by Gemtek and "cased" by Linksys in a strangely big box of poor design. The board was not ment for the time tested Linksys cases, probably. BEFVP42 seems to be designed by Linksys from the beginning.

    I would like to ask you to post a few comments on the BEFVP41 or the differences between those devices.
  2. Sfor

    Sfor Network Guru Member

    The problem is a bit more complicated, than I've counted on. Different sources are giving different BEFVP41 WAN port speeds. The user manual says it is just 10 MBit port, while other sources are saying it is 10/100 MBit.

    The Linksys support says the BEFVP41 can provide VPN bandwidth up to 90% of the Internet connection speed. I think the router will not go 90Mbit with 3DES encryption on a 100Mbit connection.
  3. Sfor

    Sfor Network Guru Member

    I've found an information the BEFVP41 is fitted with SAMSUNG S3C1510B(ARM7)and Hifn 7901 CPUs.

    According to Hifn 7901 specification it can go up to 32 Mbit. So, it is almost an exact equivalent of the WRV200 capabilities.

    The only remaining problem is the WAN port speed. Looks like there were a few hardware versions of this router. There were 10 and 100 Mbit WAN port versions, probably.
  4. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member


    the BEFVP41 was Linksy's "pre-cisco" SOHO vpn solution before "mass production as fast as you can make it" became the norm :) By the way, the WRV200 supports a maximum of 5 IPSEC vpn tunnels :)

    Think of the BEFVP41 Router as the 1995 Ford Mustang GT (5.0 Liter, V8 "Push rod" Engine) and the WRV200 as the 1996 Ford Mustang GT (4.6 Liter, V8 "Modular" Engine). The 5.0 Liter engine ran great (solid chipset, abundant memory, reliable processor, proven performance) but there was only "so much" performance you could get out of it.

    With the advent of the 4.6 Liter engine, you could achieve all of the same functionality as the 5.0 Liter engine but at "half" the expense it cost to build the 5.0 Liter engine while allowing for more features to be added, thus resulting in increased performance. Could you as a business owner pass that up also??? Personally, I prefer the "push rod" engine (I own a 5.0 Liter V8 Mustang by the way :) )

    The BEFVP41 router cost a little more to build along with its components if I recall from a review I read a while ago whereas with the WRV200, the board is a little cheaper to build "but" allows for more functionality to be added to it. Think about it, where else will you find a wireless router (wrv200) that will give you wired/wireless vlan, Wireless SSID broadcast, QoS, static dhcp, 5 IPSEC tunnels, 10 free IPSEC vpn clients, WMM and SPI firewall for under 100 dollars? The closest you could probably find is the Cisco 871W, which has a majority of these features (plus a few more obviously) but you'd be looking at around 800 dollars. All of a sudden, the WRV200 appears to be a better choice...

    In the end, my personal belief is that the BEFVP41 was a better router, unfortunately, cost of manufacturing may have played a part in the birth of the WRV200 line (cheaper but more functional).

    Again, these are just my thoughts of the two routers...

  5. Toxic

    Toxic Administrator Staff Member

    if your wanting a solid VPN Wired router, I would spend a bit more money on the likes of the RV042/82 which is a solid robust router.
  6. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    Agreed. The BEFVP41 doesn't support qvpn, but you could probably use greenbow vpn like most people have used in the past.

  7. Sfor

    Sfor Network Guru Member

    It is not as solid as it appears to be. I had a chance to unlock an RV042 with a locked WEB GUI and VPN, yesterday.
  8. Toxic

    Toxic Administrator Staff Member

    Care to explain chance to unlock a rv042 with a locked Web GUI?
  9. Sfor

    Sfor Network Guru Member

    The device was locked. All other services appeared to be working correctly, only gateway to gateway tunnels and WEB GUI stopped working. It was necesary to disconnect the power cord for a while. Then everything started to work as usual.
  10. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    That sounds more like a "reset" rather than an "unlock." I think your using the word "locked" threw "me" off for a second until I understood what you were referring to.

    What was on the other side of the RV042 if I may ask?

  11. Sfor

    Sfor Network Guru Member

    Now, I'm confused. What do yo mean by "the other side"?
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice