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

Cisco DNA Center vs Marvis Virtual Network Assistant comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 10, 2024

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

Cisco DNA Center
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Network Management Applications (1st), Network Automation (2nd)
Marvis Virtual Network Assi...
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
47th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Cisco DNA Center is 1.2%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Marvis Virtual Network Assistant is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cisco DNA Center1.2%
Marvis Virtual Network Assistant0.4%
Other98.4%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Mahir Öztürk - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Engineer at NGN Bilgi ve İletişim Hizmetleri
Client history has helped resolve past network issues more efficiently
I mostly use the client history feature of Cisco DNA Center. I didn't use the real-time monitoring capability of Cisco DNA Center because I primarily used it for client history regarding issues and problems. I don't use it for real-time monitoring. If there is a problem, I can inspect the situation and see what is happening, which is beneficial.
PRADIPJOSHI - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner at a transportation company with 11-50 employees
Used for troubleshooting and receiving real-time alerts and works on artificial intelligence
I always recommend Marvis to every customer because it requires no additional direct involvement. Marvis has been developed well using AI and machine learning technology. Its AI engine updates itself regularly, which is a beneficial feature. I request that Juniper integrate a cloud identity engine and simplify the Microsoft Azure Active Directory Services integration with the SRX hardware firewall. Additionally, the SRX firewall needs a more robust graphical user interface. Currently, we can only configure the SRX using the CLI; if a wrong command is entered, restoring it cannot be easy. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"DNA Center is scalable."
"Automation helps configure devices without manual intervention, enabling zero-touch provisioning."
"It does a lot of things automatically, and that's the big thing with it. They're making the software so that you don't need to be as knowledgeable as me on the switching and routing side to get your work done. If you want, you can have DNA troubleshoot your problem for you and give you solutions or fix it itself, if it was something that's just a configuration issue."
"It is very versatile in terms of analytics."
"It is simple to manage and it is all done from a single dashboard."
"The solution helps in user microsegmentation."
"I like the visibility, instant build, network, policies, and the ability to control access. I also like that you can visualize your whole network."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it gives some kind of ease in operations, especially since our company is moving from CLI to GUI-based configuration."
"Marvis Virtual Network Assistant uses AI to find problems or to get information from devices."
"If you ask any questions about Marvis, it will respond immediately and use some solution. It will be very easy and save you time."
 

Cons

"DNA Center has been on the market for a few years and they need to update it."
"The product has many features that do not work properly."
"There should be an option for automation of template deployment by using the stored data. It is not easy to save configuration information for lots of devices without using other tools. There should be a tighter, better repository of information that can be merged with the templates."
"An area for improvement in Cisco DNA Center is the latency in data correlation. For example, sometimes, when an issue happens, and I check the logs, I can't find the corresponding log. There's a delay in log replication, so this is what needs improvement in Cisco DNA Center. Reporting in Cisco DNA Center could also be improved because it only has a few templates, and you can't customize it based on your requirements. There aren't many options available in Cisco DNA Center regarding reporting, versus Cisco Prime, which has excellent features for different levels of detailed reports. I'd like to see real-time data replication in the next release of Cisco DNA Center, similar to what's done in Meraki. Data in Meraki is real-time with no delay, so data is immediately replicated in the cloud. Currently, there's a lag in Cisco DNA Center, and addressing that lag is the enhancement I'd like to see in Cisco DNA Center. The solution also needs to be more user-friendly."
"The weaknesses primarily involve pricing and the ongoing need for increased bandwidth and data throughput."
"One area that needs improvement is the upgrade process."
"There are some software problems from version to version. It takes a long time for DNA Center to recognize the video and control access devices."
"Cisco DNA Center should improve its configuration management. It is better to have a dev version before pushing it."
"It should add real-time application visibility."
"It would be a good idea to integrate the solution to support other vendors besides Juniper."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."
"We have a three-year license with them."
"The solution is a little bit expensive but depends a lot on the customer's usage. If you use it in the right place, you can easily pay for it."
"The tool's licensing may not come across as something that may be friendly for users."
"The price could be better. It's a very expensive tool."
"Licensing for Cisco DNA Center is a little bit expensive, just like any Cisco solution. Its cost could still be improved."
"The partnership price is notably high, but it ultimately depends on the chosen business model."
"It is an expensive solution."
"Marvis Virtual Network Assistant is not an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Healthcare Company
22%
Retailer
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise25
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco DNA Center?
The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it gives some kind of ease in operations, especially since our company is moving from CLI to GUI-based configuration.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco DNA Center?
After evaluating other solutions, we will provide feedback.
What needs improvement with Cisco DNA Center?
In my opinion, the client history in Cisco DNA Center can be longer than 10 days, perhaps extending to 15 or 20 days. I am using it in a huge factory in Turkey, and sometimes I need to see what occ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Marvis Virtual Network Assistant?
Marvis Virtual Network Assistant is not an expensive solution. On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten.
What needs improvement with Marvis Virtual Network Assistant?
It should add real-time application visibility. Marvis's interface is good. We don't need any additional interface. However, if it could accept voice commands, that would be a great improvement
What is your primary use case for Marvis Virtual Network Assistant?
It is mainly used for troubleshooting and receiving real-time alerts. Marvis makes it easy to track the issue by providing specific information, like the exact time the connection was lost. It simp...
 

Also Known As

DNA Center
No data available
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco DNA Center vs. Marvis Virtual Network Assistant and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.