Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

A10 Networks Thunder CGN vs Juniper MX Series Routers comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 7, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

A10 Networks Thunder CGN
Ranking in Carrier Grade Network Address Translation (CGNAT)
2nd
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Juniper MX Series Routers
Ranking in Carrier Grade Network Address Translation (CGNAT)
1st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
34
Ranking in other categories
Routers (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Carrier Grade Network Address Translation (CGNAT) category, the mindshare of A10 Networks Thunder CGN is 23.8%, down from 35.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Juniper MX Series Routers is 21.3%, down from 37.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Carrier Grade Network Address Translation (CGNAT) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Juniper MX Series Routers21.3%
A10 Networks Thunder CGN23.8%
Other54.9%
Carrier Grade Network Address Translation (CGNAT)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1336776 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enabled us to collapse hardware- and software-based solutions into one
The scalability is good for us. The 5440 HW is more than capable of handling our current traffic patterns allowing us to grow and not have to do in-place upgrades in the immediate to near term. It's meeting a small portion of our overall network needs, but provides the solution that we sought out. From a hardware standpoint, it makes up a small fraction of our overall deployment, but the usage behind it is very different from what we utilize our production data center hardware for. As I mentioned, it is just providing outbound NAT-ing for us. As we grow our data center space we would expand its usage and footprint. We typically see changes in traffic due to our organic growth and ramp-up of internal services. We plan to implement the following technologies/strategies in the next three years: keeping up with PFS/ECC encryption standards as they evolve. We may or may not move more applications to public cloud. Also, it's possible we could implement cloud repatriation of applications from public cloud to private data centers.
Patrick Anaku - PeerSpot reviewer
Performance excels with reliable uptime and robust features
The best features of Juniper MX Series Routers include their performance, which is quite good for us in terms of hardware performance. The Junos OS, the software, is stable, and we don't have many issues with the Juniper system itself. They have numerous features that allow us to deliver services, be it Layer 2 connectivity to customers, Layer 3 connectivity, data center connectivity, or even security features. Hardware performance has been a top-notch reason why we chose Juniper in the beginning, especially the MX series, which performs well in terms of network uptime and we don't encounter many failures. We have had a bad experience here and there with the ACX series, and their network performance is not so great compared to MX, so we have mostly done away with the ACX and only use MX at some of the core sites. I have seen a return on investment from the solution. Initially, we deployed MX80s on the network, and since our company has been in operation since 2006, from that point we used MX80s until around 2016 when we upgraded most of them to MX204s. From our experience, once we buy an MX204, we don't have issues with it; we have never had to replace an MX204 on the network. Once we deploy it, it works until we decide to upgrade the capacity. The return on investment is significant, as once we buy it, we have no worries about performance.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable features are its ease of use and deployment, and being able to collapse several solutions into a single solution, all contained within a single bit of hardware and software."
"It has freed up a lot of our IP space and has been extremely reliable. We have set it up in a high availability scenario, testing it many times. It has been absolutely perfect in terms of failover."
"It is very easy to use. Both the GUI and CLI interface are consistent, which makes the ease of access throughout various constituencies possible. It's also well-documented and logical."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution is quite stable. We've found it to be very good. There aren't bugs, glitches, or crashes."
"I think that the extensions are very valuable. The way you can test the configuration before applying that configuration permanently is very helpful. The rollback configuration is also very useful."
"For the Juniper MX Series Routers, it plays a crucial role in our network. They offer numerous features, enabling multiple connections and handling various reports. The routers efficiently manage the number of switched fabric codes and process features based on the specific switch requirements. Previously, I utilized them for processing and addressing customer-side concerns. The routers have excellent documentation, making it easy to resolve any issues that may arise. It's excellent for customization, especially in tailoring the Windows configuration environment. Overall, dealing with this solution has been straightforward and efficient."
"The full Internet DGP is a valuable feature."
"The stability of Juniper is better than Cisco's."
"I would say it is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is the standard routing protocol."
 

Cons

"They don't track concurrent port usage. We have to do that in another way and it's not a very clean way. That is something that I know they could do, but they don't."
"There are a couple of features that they could look to implement, versus the workarounds that they have in place. Regarding IPv4 and IPv6, there are a couple of opportunities in there that they are working on, as well."
"The solution needs to offer SDN features."
"The documentation needs to be updated to reflect the changes made in the latest update."
"It is not scalable, unfortunately."
"The integration could be better."
"In terms of what could be improved, they could extend the software warranty to be for its lifetime, as well. At the moment, the software warranty is limited, I think to one year."
"The pricing is a bit too high."
"The only thing that might need improvement would be the occasional downtime."
"The setup was a bit complex."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost to buy it initially was a single purchase price. This was a cost for the hardware and software, but we got a year of service with it. Annually, we pay them a service fee, but it's not much money."
"The FlexPool consumption-based licensing model has the ability to spin up VMs as needed for NAT, as well as their ADC, which is their load balancing stuff. We are considering that, as that is a pretty attractive feature."
"I would rate the pricing model a seven out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. It is not cheap."
"There is a license for this solution and the price is very competitive. The cost is less expensive than some competitors, such as Cisco. There are additional costs for support licenses."
"The pricing of Juniper MX Series Routers is okay compared to other technologies."
"We have to pay for the device and licensing. The support service requires additional costs."
"The prices for Juniper MX Series Routers are reasonable."
"The price of this solution is better than other competitors, such as Cisco. We receive a lot of discounts which make the price less expensive and attractive."
"An additional license can be purchased for support of a next-generation firewall."
"$300 to $400 is the hardware cost and for licensing cost, it may be around, for support and all, $100 per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Carrier Grade Network Address Translation (CGNAT) solutions are best for your needs.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
University
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise8
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Juniper MX Series Routers?
For the Juniper MX Series Routers, it plays a crucial role in our network. They offer numerous features, enabling multiple connections and handling various reports. The routers efficiently manage ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Juniper MX Series Routers?
I would rate it around a three. While I'm not deeply involved in pricing discussions, I believe it is comparatively more affordable than Cisco.
What needs improvement with Juniper MX Series Routers?
The areas of Juniper MX Series Routers that have room for improvement include the port count; for instance, the MX204 has only four 40G or 100G ports, which is quite limited. While I know there are...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Juniper Enterprise Routers, MX Series, Junos Address Aware
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Leucom Group
AARNet Pty Ltd, Allegro Networks, Atlantech Online, Availity, Baloise Insurance, Black Lotus, CATV, Blue Box
Find out what your peers are saying about A10 Networks Thunder CGN vs. Juniper MX Series Routers and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.