We performed a comparison between Cisco DNA Virtualization [EOL] and VMware NSX based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, VMware, Array Networks and others in Network Virtualization.
"The management aspect of the solution is its most valuable feature. Software-defined issues have been good for us. It makes the management process easy."
"Cisco has a good technical support team."
"The stability is great. That's one of the things that we can quantify and leverage through NSX, because it's less complex. We have the availability to manage multiple things at the same time. You can identify problems before they manifest."
"The dashboard is comprehensive and easy to use."
"VMware NSX offers some of the best features for security, such as micro-segmentation."
"From a security standpoint, the customer was able to better secure critical workloads while routing L2/L3 worked normally, giving them more confidence that they would be ready for any potential security incident mitigation or outage (DR)."
"The most valuable features are security and dynamic routing."
"The microsegmentation allows me to sleep at night. My job is reducing risk, plugging security holes, and working with the automated layer security. Even if somebody spins up a new server, it has to have a tag in NSX."
"VMware NSX is a very good solution. It's also a scalable solution."
"Technically, VMware NSX is more advanced technology-wise when compared to others. We have been studying it and so far, so good. We know that the NSX product is superior when it comes to software virtualized networks. </p> <p>If you are looking to work with new and future technologies, then NSX is one of the best options. It costs less for power consumption since it will be a virtual network and not a pure physical network that consumes more energy."
"It would be helpful to have better information on how to implement this product."
"The stability of the solution could be improved."
"The training costs a minimum of $3,000, which is expensive and should be reduced."
"Their licensing model should make it easier to purchase licenses."
"We would to have a reverse proxy. This would add great value to the solution."
"The feature it can improve is essentially application-based load balancing with intelligent load distribution for applications that require redundancy and high availability."
"An area for improvement in VMware NSX is that it uses up more resources and is heavy on the network. What I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is more automation."
"It was stable for one year, there was no impact. In the last two months, we had two big incidents."
"Since most people are very much used to physical networking, they find it difficult to use VMware NSX in the initial stage."
"The support needs improvement."
More Cisco DNA Virtualization [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Cisco DNA Virtualization [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Network Virtualization while VMware NSX is ranked 2nd in Network Virtualization with 93 reviews. Cisco DNA Virtualization [EOL] is rated 8.0, while VMware NSX is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco DNA Virtualization [EOL] writes "Scalable with a straightforward setup and good management capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware NSX writes "Allows for seamless micro-segmentation and the support is exceptional". Cisco DNA Virtualization [EOL] is most compared with , whereas VMware NSX is most compared with Nutanix Flow Network Security, Illumio, Cisco ACI, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Cisco Secure Workload.
See our list of best Network Virtualization vendors.
We monitor all Network Virtualization 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.
