Difference Between Mesh and Star Topology

The main Difference Between Mesh and Star Topology is that Star Topology is often used in smaller networks where a central hub manages data flow. On the other hand, Mesh Topology is usually seen in larger and more complex setups. It offers multiple pathways for data.

Mesh Topology

Devices connect directly to each other and create a “web” of connections in mesh Topology. This setup allows for multiple paths for data to travel. They improve reliability and speed.

Star Topology

All devices connect to a central hub or switch in a star topology. This hub acts as the “center” of the network. It manages the data flow between devices.

Mesh Topology vs Star Topology

The following comparison table shows the difference between Mesh and Star Topology:

Feature	Star Topology	Mesh Topology
Structure	Central hub with individual device connections	Web-like with direct device connections
Reliability	Moderate (depends on the central hub; if it fails, the whole network fails)	Very high due to multiple paths; if one connection fails, others can maintain the network
Cost	Lower; cost-effective for small setups due to fewer cables and simpler design	Higher; requires extensive cabling and complex setup, which increases installation costs
Installation	Simple and quick; requires a central hub or switch and individual connections to devices	Complex; requires many cables and careful planning to ensure all devices connect directly
Maintenance	Easier to troubleshoot; issues are often isolated to single devices	Difficult to manage and troubleshoot due to numerous connections
Scalability	Limited; adding more devices can cause strain on the hub and slow down the network	High; new devices can easily connect without affecting existing connections
Data Security	Moderate; all data goes through the hub, which could be a point of vulnerability	High; direct device connections make data less accessible to external interception
Common Uses	Homes, small offices, and schools; suitable for simpler, non-critical networks	Hospitals, large corporations, high-security environments; suitable for critical, large networks
Pros	– Simple to install and set up – Cost-effective for small networks – Easy troubleshooting	– High reliability due to multiple paths – Increased security for sensitive data – Scalable and flexible
Cons	– Single point of failure (central hub) – Limited scalability – Potential slowdowns if overloaded	– Expensive setup – Complex to maintain – Difficult to troubleshoot due to multiple pathways