We performed a comparison between Brocade Ethernet Switches and Cisco Ethernet Switches based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Ethernet Switches solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I have not had any issues with our Brocade switches."
"There's a zone for each server and services in the storage."
"The most valuable feature of Brocade Ethernet Switches is the good range of access it provides."
"The initial setup was really straightforward and easy."
"The technical support is good."
"It has good integration with HPE Primera. They have smart zoning in which the administration is very easy. You don't have to do anything. Zoning and other things are done automatically if you just enable the smart zoning. That's one very good thing in HP."
"The reliability of Brocade is the most valuable feature. The solution has been up and running for over ten years without any fail, fixes required, or breakdowns. It is a very strong piece of equipment."
"The switches last for a very long time."
"You can tap into all of the features for your virtual workload environment."
"A stable product that is absolutely dependable."
"The hardware is rugged. We use it for the basic configuration."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco Ethernet Switches is their capacity."
"We can easily integrate the product with any OEM solutions."
"The quality of service is one of the main reasons we use Cisco in our organization. It's quite high and very reliable. The switches also end up working for a long time, so there's less need to replace them as often as others. We have some switches in our company that has been running since 2006, for example. They are quite old, but they still work."
"We can expect Cisco Ethernet Switches to last for years without issue."
"Tech support has always been good."
"Brocade Ethernet Switches need a better interface and centralized management."
"The solution could be more secure."
"No graphical interface."
"These switches are no longer supported."
"Brocade Ethernet Switches could improve by having better compatibility with web management of older versions."
"It should be simpler. There are still some things that can be simpler in the Brocade switches."
"There are some performance issues."
"We've had hardware problems like SSDs, ports, networking, things like that."
"It could be cheaper, especially the DNA license. One DNA license is around $3,000 for a three-year contract."
"Up to a certain network size, it is easy to scale, but after that, it becomes difficult."
"Cisco has a licensing procedure that is very complicated and it changes every six months."
"Very highly priced in comparison to other similar products."
"They need to offer free replacements until the end of life for devices."
"Their firmware could be better secured against vulnerabilities or other exploits. Also, only selected catalyst switches are allowed to onboard to Cisco SD Access technology."
"When you contact support, they don't give you the expert at first, they give you the beginner. Only after going around in a circle do they give you experts. Why don't they just give the expert from the beginning?"
Brocade Ethernet Switches is ranked 19th in Ethernet Switches with 10 reviews while Cisco Ethernet Switches is ranked 1st in Ethernet Switches with 123 reviews. Brocade Ethernet Switches is rated 8.2, while Cisco Ethernet Switches is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Brocade Ethernet Switches writes "This solution has been up and running for over ten years without any fail". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Ethernet Switches writes "It's a solidly stable product from a leader in the field". Brocade Ethernet Switches is most compared with Juniper EX Series Ethernet Switches, Aruba Switches, HPE Ethernet Switches, Mellanox Switches and Arista Networks Platform, whereas Cisco Ethernet Switches is most compared with Aruba Switches, Fortinet FortiSwitch - Secure Access, D-Link Ethernet Switches, Ubiquiti UniFi Switches and 3Com H3C Switches. See our Brocade Ethernet Switches vs. Cisco Ethernet Switches report.
See our list of best Ethernet Switches vendors.
We monitor all Ethernet Switches reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
Have to agree with Durrell on the Cisco offerings and certifications. I would say Avaya is more on VoIP capability and have not heard about their switch portfolio. For HP networking, they are on par with Cisco. In terms of capability and support, I would say Cisco is there.
Have you used any other vendors in the Ethernet Switch market?
Answer: Yes, I have used Arista Networks as well.
Have to agree with Durrell, while the equipment and support performs better than the competitors in my opinion, the shear volume of training that has been put out by Cisco has made it the leader. Other providers offer training of course, but none are as comprehensive and well known as the Cisco offerings..they have become THE standard for networking.
Hi,
Cisco simply has very well working equipment and it's a huge company which has gold reserves bigger than fort knox :)
I've used enterasys, juniper, noname and 3com switches, everyone has its advantages but cisco was what I liked most. Simply does its work and there is no place for failure. Only thing you need is vacuum machine from time to time.
The emphasis that has been put on certifications is the biggest reason these vendors are not taking up a bigger share of the market. The industry standards for networking certs are the Cisco ones. Since the certs are catered to their equipment, it just makes sense that they have such a huge market share.
For price/performance, I think HP and Juniper offer more than Cisco. HP typically comes in at a much lower cost for comparable features and throughput, and their switches have been very reliable for me. Juniper switches are similarly priced to Cisco gear, but they usually offer a much wider range of functions, along with equal or better performance.
All of the reasons Nuno listed, above, are valid. In addition:
4. High Performance - On balance, for most classes of switch, Cisco gear performs better. I've had great experience with HP Procurve switches, and their price/performance has been very good. But once in a while, they couldn't keep up with demanding traffic, like iSCSI, and we had to go back to Cisco gear.
5. OEM Testing and Validation - If you're introducing new network gear - firewalls, storage, servers, etc. - you will make sure it works with Cisco switches because the installed base is huge. This is a vicious cycle - more Cisco interoperability and validation means fewer issues with Cisco gear.
I have used Netgear and 3com switches.
I have tried a few other vendors on the Ethernet switch market, especially HP, Huawei and SMC switches. Haven’t used Alcatel personally, but have had interesting feedback for them from colleagues.
Regarding Cisco however, I believe there are three main reasons for it:
1) Integration on the “cisco environment”, with a structured offer from basic switches, up to multi-layer equipment, allowing a consistent platform all through the enterprise.
2) Management interface – ranging from graphic management (through local web interface, CiscoWorks modules, etc.), to CLI, with the Cisco IOS, provides great flexibility for remote management, configuration backup, and monitoring.
3) Expertise of in-house personnel – Both the training provided by Cisco itself, and the fact that Cisco has a strong base for the remaining network infrastructure (routers, and other network devices).
There is also the issue that, sometimes, some mixed vendor environment can bring issues with 802.1q trunking (I’ve seen issues with HP Switches while having problems with a VLAN 1 on the HP mixing with a native VLAN on Cisco for instance…), and other proprietary protocols (CDP for instance) that can have implications with the way management or configuration is done…
Also, in some cases, the use of other technologies that cisco has brought along over the years – Network access control, that interfaces with Cisco switches for instance, and the buildup of different interactions with other technologies, ends up creating a technical barrier on top of the barrier for change on things like:
“our other 30 switches are Cisco, and now I’ll place another vendor one?”.
And on that question, price is not likely to be the most important factor, but TCO, existing expertise, and applications running on the network (that need QoS for instance), and integration with existing monitoring, configuration management, and infrastructure, may be the most important factor on the decision…