Anyone who knows networking and the OSI model knows how Ethernet delivers packets, which makes this audiophile switch dubious at best. Functionally, this switch operates no different from the $20 TP-Link switches we use on our network here. Packets either arrive or they don't. That's how Ethernet works. There is no magical "delivery of bits and bytes" that happens in a $2,500 switch vs. what we use here with standard switches. One complaint audiophiles have about digital audio is jitter, but that's not applicable to Ethernet either.
The only advantage some audiophile networking components have is the isolation of electrical noise (EMI/RFI) that could travel along the wire. Granted, Ethernet cable operates in twisted pair configurations that offer common-mode rejection of noise (and higher categories of cable use tighter twisting to improve the common-mode rejection), so it shouldn't carry too much noise. But there have been a few studies on how noise can enter an audiophile component from an Ethernet interface, and those manufacturers provide means in their components to help minimalize it. (Think of the EMI/RFI traveling along the copper and making its way to the circuit board inside the component, entering the chassis ground--that's the only way I can describe it. It's outside the digital signal, in other words.)
Better yet, some use optical Ethernet adapters (convert the wired Ethernet to a fiber optic connection) just to break that connection. It's also not inexpensive, but I'd see it as a better option.
So my only thought here is the $2,500 switch might clean up some of that noise, but the packets still flow exactly the same way, and are reassembled into a data stream in the receiving component. I'm sure there are other ways of cleaning up EMI/RFI from Ethernet that don't cost anywhere near as much. And again, the better manufacturers minimize it inside the components anyway, so... 🤷♂️