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

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs Cisco Wireless comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 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 Meraki Wireless LAN
Ranking in Wireless LAN
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.1
Number of Reviews
119
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Cisco Wireless
Ranking in Wireless LAN
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
153
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Wireless LAN category, the mindshare of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is 12.7%, up from 12.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Wireless is 11.4%, down from 14.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Wireless LAN
 

Featured Reviews

RezaPradipta - PeerSpot reviewer
Streamline network management with a unified dashboard for seamless device integration
The primary use case for Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is mostly for enterprise wireless, including guest Wi-Fi and enterprise Wi-Fi. I use it across various industries with a focus on retail Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN offers a single pane of glass management. It only comes with a controller on the…
GulfrazAhmad - PeerSpot reviewer
Integrates with ISE, and is secure, reliable, and easy to deploy
The main concern is the length and overlapping. We have to put on four to six access points on the same floor, and we face the issue of overlapping areas. If Cisco can extend the range of their indoor APs, we would need to install just one or two access points, and it would eliminate the problem of the overlapping area. They should provide built-in features for safe authentication. Right now, we integrate with ISE and FortiClient for this feature. We first check the NAC, and after the NAC and before the domain, a token password installed on their mobile or a physical token is required to join the network. If Cisco had built-in authentication, we would be able to eliminate one product from our network.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Its ease of use and flexibility are most valuable. It is cloud-based software."
"It is easy to set up. You can do everything on the GUI. You don't need to trace cables. You don't need to connect to the switch. Everything is there, right in front of you."
"The interface makes it easy to manage."
"I have found it to be stable."
"The primary value lies in the ease of configuration; these products seamlessly integrate, and work well together."
"The management console is valuable."
"The functionalities are quite professional and complete. It offers good integration with other Meraki products, like switches and the firewall. You can get an overview of all networks and the host. It's really great; nobody else can do that."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is that it is fast and does the job."
"The LAN network conductivity is good."
"All the features of the solution are good. The enterprise environment seamlessly integrates with Cisco Wireless. I have contacted customer service and support about licenses and other technical aspects. I have not faced any issues. The solution is good for our environment."
"Support is fantastic. They are helpful and responsive."
"The technical support from Cisco is good."
"The ability to make different types of networks, such as land networks, is the most valuable part of the solution."
"The most valuable features are mobility and security."
"Some of the valuable features of this solution are security, the controller is simple to configure, devices are easy to install, and we use the software to administrate all the APs."
"The capacity, security, downloading, and exporting data are all very good. It's user-friendly, but if I look at Meraki versus normal Cisco equipment, then I think that Meraki will be much more user-friendly."
 

Cons

"We face a bottleneck on the gateway while using the solution for large enterprises."
"Its price could be improved."
"It's performing well, really well. We don't have any issues. We only have issues if there is a lot of rogue APs in the neighborhood and that not Meraki's fault."
"The solution's pricing could be improved."
"The licensing could be a bit better."
"Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN could improve by having more granularity in terms of the data displayed. However, I understand that with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, you need to have a compromise point to what are the functions that you're going to provide to the users versus ease of use. More granularity in terms of the data and the things that you can do to the devices would be helpful. For example, when we wanted to make a change, restriction, or segregation within Palo Alto, we can go to the level of detail that we want. The amount of detail provided is amazing, it is very granular. However, it comes with much more difficulty, it requires a technical understanding of the environment compared to Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN."
"Its licensing can be better."
"We'd like to have better mapping to showcase low-coverage areas."
"The solution could be cheaper and have a better web interface."
"It should be fully compatible with other devices."
"I wouldn't mind if Cisco allowed their premiere devices to be able to have that cloud-based support as well, or cloud-based management."
"The main problem that traditional solutions like this one have is that you need to buy packages to deliver a similar solution as a Meraki one."
"Many wireless controllers' firmware have bugs in their new releases, which are not stable, especially in an environment with many wireless AP (WAP) types."
"There is a problem with the controller. When we have to restart the controller, it does not show the time. We have to manually configure the time when we restart it. I have read about this issue, to get some information, and all answers are about having to connect it with a time server, which is very difficult."
"The solution should introduce natural language troubleshooting processes. It will identify possible problems or errors due to the symptoms."
"There is room for improvement regarding HA issues and Radius integration."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is good, but it could be improved."
"Its price is higher than other products. It is above the expectation of customers. So, every time we need to fight for a good price."
"These units cost between $800 and $900 per device and on top of that, you have to pay yearly fees for maintenance."
"I haven't conducted a price comparison yet, but based on information, it appears to be more affordable than the current environment. Therefore, I consider the price to be reasonable."
"We pay licensing fees."
"It is a relatively expensive solution compared to traditional network alternatives."
"As is always the case, the price could be better, although I do not recall exactly how much this comes out to."
"At this price point, I would not mind seeing a four-way channel, instead of a 3x3 or a 4x4, like they do in the Cisco Aironet system with their other brand. For the same price point in this other Cisco brand, it is a lot cheaper, and you can get a slightly better throughput than you can with these."
"Its cost is a little bit higher than other products. Fortinet and Huawei are cheaper. If we were not a bank, I would go for Huawei or Fortinet because they are cheap, and I don't need that much security. A financial institute, a university, or a medical institute would need security to protect the customer data. That's why we buy this high-end product that has integrated security features."
"The price for this product is a little bit high, which is why I am not using the most recent version."
"Cisco is not a cheap solution. Their licensing cost is higher than that for others."
"The price of the solution is fair."
"The product could be priced better."
"The price of Cisco Wireless is expensive and there is an additional cost for support."
"However, when you integrate the access point and the controller with the DNAT across multiple sites, you need a DNAT cluster, which is a costly solution. Every site has a controller, and a DNAT cluster is not a good option in a global framework. It's okay for a small office or a few offices. But when you're talking about 500 offices, the cost becomes enormous."
"There are annual subscriptions to use this solution. I have not been able to understand the licensing of Cisco. Some of the Cisco executives were not able to understand them either. When you first start out the price is zero but when it comes to a time of renewal you have to pay."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Wireless LAN solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user212721 - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 24, 2015
Cisco vs. Aruba Wireless Solutions
Cisco or Aruba Networks? If you are considering wireless access solutions, this is a common question that you are probably asking. You probably have sales people knocking at your door. How do you make sense of all the stories that you are presented with. If you have done any research, you are…
 

Answers from the Community

NC
Nov 10, 2021
Nov 10, 2021
Cisco Wireless is very robust, very rugged, and can handle indoor and outdoor coverage extremely well. We found it to be very reliable and to consistently run very efficiently. Cisco Wireless helped us get more network access to more people wirelessly across some very large spaces. It is expensive, though. The Cisco Wireless portal, like many Cisco products, can be very complex. The flexibility...
See 2 answers
AA
Sep 7, 2021
The standard answer to such a question is: it depends. The pricing for both solutions is very similar: per-AP, Meraki is more expensive than Cisco Wireless. Cisco APs are cheaper, but the controller raises the solution price to be almost equal to Meraki. Meraki is subscription-based and requires constant internet access to manage the system. If the annual license expires, the APs will work, but you can't manage them or read reports of the Meraki portal. Cisco Wireless is a one-time payment for the hardware with annual support payments. if you have a small office with only a few APs needed, you can use the Cisco Mobility Express Controller (which uses one of the APs or a Catalyst Switch as the controller) but that has a limit of 100 APs.
Nov 10, 2021
Cisco Wireless is very robust, very rugged, and can handle indoor and outdoor coverage extremely well. We found it to be very reliable and to consistently run very efficiently. Cisco Wireless helped us get more network access to more people wirelessly across some very large spaces. It is expensive, though. The Cisco Wireless portal, like many Cisco products, can be very complex. The flexibility of the controllers needs fixing and Cisco Wireless requires a bit of tweaking to get the stability right. We would also like to see the reporting improved - this would help make troubleshooting easier. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is very user-friendly. You don’t have to be a wireless engineer to set it up. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is cloud-based, which is very convenient as you don’t have to have a physical controller, saving valuable space, power, and redundancy. This solution offers advanced configurations that are a great fit for small to medium-sized businesses that can’t employ an advanced tech team. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is high-performance, stable, scalable, and very easy to deploy, and offers a dashboard that makes managing the solution very easy. Some of the built-in capabilities and filtering with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN needs to be made easier to use. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN needs to better identify devices, and the TAC reading and interpretation capabilities are not always accurate. There are also some processing limitations when you have multiple SSIDs. Conclusion As these are both Cisco products, they offer brand recognition you can trust, great quality, and good durability. We found that Cisco Wireless offered slightly better access points and improved coverage, allowing the creation of better networks. Cisco Wireless takes a one-time payment for the hardware, and then annual payments. If you employ Cisco’s knowledgeable team members, this will be a good fit for you. The huge selling point for Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is its ease of use. You don’t need to have a lot of knowledge to deploy or manage processes, which makes this a great product for smaller businesses with a less tech-savvy team.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Educational Organization
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What are pros and cons of Aruba 515 Series AP vs. Cisco Meraki or Extreme Networks?
Depends. I have personally used both Cisco and Aruba so I am familiar with them. Extreme I am not, so unless they have some feature that I need or want, I wouldn't consider them. Do you have expe...
Which is better - Cisco Wireless or Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN?
Cisco Wireless is very robust, very rugged, and can handle indoor and outdoor coverage extremely well. We found it to be very reliable and to consistently run very efficiently. Cisco Wireless helpe...
How does Ruckus Wireless compare to Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN?
Cisco’s Meraki Virtual MX is a virtual instance of the Meraki SD-WAN appliance. We liked the Meraki. The Wifi APs are a great feature. The dashboard is a simple interface and easy to learn. It feat...
Which is better - Ruckus Wireless or Cisco Wireless?
Ruckus Wireless offers users the benefit of being both easy to set up and get running as well as being very user friendly. This user-friendly quality also renders it easy to learn how to use and ma...
How does Cisco Wireless compare with Aruba Wireless?
On the most basic level, Cisco Wireless can offer a rather straightforward initial setup. In the span of about three hours, the basic framework can be set up. Step-by-step instructions are availabl...
What do you like most about Cisco Wireless?
Cisco Wireless improves mobility and flexibility. The only case we are working on is with hospitals, focusing on the mobility of doctors within the hospital. Everywhere, doctors need to be connect...
 

Also Known As

MR18, MR26, MR32, MR34, MR66, MR72, Meraki Wireless LAN, Meraki WLAN
Cisco WLAN Controller
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Advanced Medical Transport, Banco de Guayaquil, Baylor Scott & White Health, BH Telecom, Bowling Green State University, Calligaris, Children's Hospital Colorado, City of Biel, Del Papa Distributing, Department of Justice, Dimension Data, Dualtec Cloud Builders, Electricity Authority of Cyprus, Grupo Industrial Saltillo (GIS), Hertz, K&L Gates , LightEdge, Lone Star College System, Management Science Associates, Mindtree, NBC Olympics, Quest, Sony Corporation, The Department of Education in Western Australia, Valley Proteins
Aegean Motorway, Baylor Scott & White Health, Beachbody, Bellevue, Brunel University London, Bucks County Intermediate Unit , Chartwell School, Children's Hospital Colorado, Cisco Live Milan, City of Biel, City of Mississauga, Dundee Precious Metals, Electricity Authority of Cyprus, Erickson Living, Goldcorp, Great Ormond Street Hospital, Grupo Industrial Saltillo (GIS)
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs. Cisco Wireless and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.