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

Cisco FabricPath vs Juniper QFabric comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 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

Cisco FabricPath
Ranking in LAN Switching
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Juniper QFabric
Ranking in LAN Switching
11th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the LAN Switching category, the mindshare of Cisco FabricPath is 3.1%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Juniper QFabric is 3.0%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
LAN Switching Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cisco FabricPath3.1%
Juniper QFabric3.0%
Other93.9%
LAN Switching
 

Featured Reviews

SanjitAchary - PeerSpot reviewer
Delivers comprehensive assessments and superior post-procurement service
In Southeast Asian countries like Indonesia and Malaysia, and in the Latin America region, delivery times can be quite lengthy. This is challenging in terms of logistics and customs. Additionally, parts availability in these regions needs improvement to address hardware failure situations, such as the availability of parts like a power cable.
Suresh Pathipatti - PeerSpot reviewer
Performs well, is easy to set up, and the vendor maintains the product well
QFabric is the core switch. We also have two Brocade switches for the Fibre level The product works fine. It is an excellent product. There are different element systems and different options for each generation of the tool. We maintain the data center and analyze issues. I have no negative…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I have experienced operational efficiencies with Cisco FabricPath that are 200% better than the old legacy equipment and protocols."
"Cisco FabricPath is highly beneficial for network performance and relatively easy to implement. It also offers straightforward monitoring capabilities."
"Cisco FabricPath is very fast, stable, extendable, and scalable. It doesn't have issues with patches or problems because it's built on the stable NXOS operating system. In a scenario using FabricPath, the spin and leaf architecture is beneficial. For example, we can use two separate spine switches like 9980s and multiple leaf switches as access switches. These leaf switches are connected using VPC between them, with each switch separated and not directly connected to the spine. This setup improves data center architecture by allowing two ways to arrange destinations, connecting the first connection to the first spine and the second to the second spine. The spines are configured as a virtual chassis. In FabricPath, we can enhance VXLANs, VPNs, and integrate with Cisco ISE for user authentication. It can also be configured with WLC to manage wireless technology, depending on the client's architecture."
"The fact that the solution is on the cloud is its most valuable aspect. If you are on the cloud, you can manage your network from anywhere, any place. It's very good."
"The technical support we get from Cisco is excellent. It's the best in the industry. We're more than satisfied with the level of service they provide."
"It is stable and reliable."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable soltuion."
"The product's most valuable feature is its ports."
"The vendor maintains the product well."
"The solution is easy to use and has good performance."
"The solution is stable."
"Juniper QFabric has various advantages including scalability, simplicity, performance, and flexibility."
"The 40 gig backbone InterConneX was valuable for our use case. It is even faster now. QFabric has spine-leaf technology or topology, which basically makes every single hop only one hop away in terms of connecting from one device to another. It is a pretty good and robust solution. It works pretty well in terms of scalability, and their technical support is amazing."
"QFabric supports redundancy and includes all of the enterprise and service provider features that customers would want in data center or service provider network."
"The most valuable feature of QFabric for network performance is its stability."
"It is known for being agile, flexible, and cost-effective when working with various vendors."
 

Cons

"It's important to note that the graphical interface often relies on Java, and compatibility with different versions of Java can be a factor."
"The initial setup is a little complex."
"Cisco FabricPath's pricing is expensive."
"Layer 3 does not have higher availability."
"I would like one management console to control the network."
"I would like to see better interoperability with other IT solutions."
"The solution is costly."
"The main issue I face is the cost."
"Improvements could be made to QFabric's life cycle management, particularly in maintaining stable versions and extending product support."
"It works too much on rebooting and there is some memory leakage."
"The disruptive upgrade was an issue for us."
"I do not use GUI's very much for switch stacks. I am always in the CLI. However, I do know that Juniper in the past has lacked on their GUI's, but they have been working on it."
"They are working on the virtualization of the actual fabric layer. They are moving away from the original spine-leaf design to a different infrastructure. Instead of having three tiers, which was the director of the interconnected nodes, they cut them back, and they still have that kind of structure."
"The stability needs to be improved."
"It would be nice if Juniper provided the system integrator with training, similar to that of Cisco."
"Having support for all OpenFlow versions would be beneficial."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of Cisco FabricPath could be reduced, it is expensive in the market here in Sri Lanka. The solution is subscriptions based, if the customer wants any future integrations, or if there are any future enhancements they will have to pay. There are different license options available, such as one or three years purchases."
"The solution falls under the pricier category, but it provides value for the price charged."
"I rate it seven out of ten on pricing as it's a bit expensive. It would be better if the price were lower, but we prioritize quality over cost."
"I rate the product's pricing a ten out of ten. Cisco switches cost around 15,000 dollars, and DNS licenses cost around 25,000 dollars. The total amount is 45,000 dollars, which is too expensive."
"The pricing for this product is good."
"The pricing of Cisco FabricPath can be quite high depending on the architecture, but it's justified by the stability it offers."
"Cisco is expensive but offers good-quality features, so I would rate it high on the pricing scale."
"FabricPath is very reasonably priced."
"The price for Juniper QFabric could improve. There are subscription, maintenance, and add-on feature fees."
"Juniper QFabric is a high-level solution but it could be less expensive."
"The pricing is high."
"In terms of price, the QFabric solution is going to be probably in the middle of the road for a fabric solution."
"The price is relatively high, but it offers an advantage over its competitors by providing better performance and functionality."
"The pricing is high and it is possible to find better pricing option solutions on the market, but the licensing model is quite flexible."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which LAN Switching solutions are best for your needs.
872,008 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
University
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Recreational Facilities/Services Company
10%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco FabricPath?
The tool makes it easy to manage multi-layer networking and increases network efficiency. I haven't faced any challenges in integrating it into our existing infrastructure.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco FabricPath?
Cisco is somewhat expensive, but it provides good quality products and operations, so I can't complain about licensing cost and setup costs. There is room for improvement in terms of pricing for th...
What needs improvement with Cisco FabricPath?
In future updates, I would prefer to see features such as more AI functionality or better integration added to Cisco FabricPath; more AI would be useful.
What do you like most about Juniper QFabric?
The most valuable feature of QFabric for network performance is its stability.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Juniper QFabric?
Juniper QFabric is not overly expensive. Licensing is required for certain features like vRRP, but setting up a virtual chassis does not necessitate a separate license.
What needs improvement with Juniper QFabric?
Improvements could be made to QFabric's lifecycle management, particularly in maintaining stable versions and extending product support. The rapid release cycle and short life span compared to comp...
 

Also Known As

FabricPath
QFabric
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bellevue, Calligaris, Electricity Authority of Cyprus, Management Science Associates, Multi-Customer, Oediv, Roper St. Francis, SNAM
MCB Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco FabricPath vs. Juniper QFabric and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
872,008 professionals have used our research since 2012.