We compared VMware NSX and Cisco Secure Workload based on our users' reviews in six categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: VMware NSX provides advanced virtual networking capabilities, a distributed firewall, and seamless integration with VMware Hypervisor. Nevertheless, it has areas that could be enhanced such as licensing clarity, compatibility with non-Windows operating systems, and user-friendliness. Conversely, Cisco Secure Workload is commended for its user-friendly interface, stability, and comprehensive solution. However, it faces challenges in terms of integration, a complex dashboard, and controversy surrounding data reduction. Cisco Secure Workload does excel in providing excellent technical support, particularly for networking products.
"A complete and powerful micro-segmentation solution."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is security."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that we don't have to do packet captures on the network."
"The most valuable feature is micro-segmentation, which is the most important with respect to visibility."
"The product offers great visibility into the network so we can enforce security measures."
"The solution offers 100% telemetry coverage. The telemetry you collect is not sampled, it's not intermittent. It's complete. You see everything in it, including full visibility of all activities on your endpoints and in your network."
"It's stable."
"Instead of proving that all the access control lists are in place and all the EPGs are correct, we can just point the auditor to a dashboard and point out that there aren't any escaped conversations. It saves an enormous, enormous amount of time."
"The best part is the blueprint creation where I can create their things and then move on to the target environment."
"We like that everything is integrated."
"The most valuable feature of VMware NSX is the ability to set up virtual networking environments."
"Overall, for me, it's a good solution and has been working well."
"It's very important for them to have small footprints and have as much services in their servers, as possible."
"The organization of it is logical, useful, and intuitive."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create, develop, and deploy servers in minutes to hours, rather than days."
"Provides flexibility to deploy and have network virtualization on different types of firewalls."
"The product must be integrated with the cloud."
"There is some overlap between Cisco Tetration and AppDynamics and I need to have a single pane of glass, rather than have to jump between different tools."
"There was a controversy when Cisco reduced the amount of data they kept, and the solution became quite cost-intensive, which made its adoption challenging….Although they have modified it now, I preferred the previous version, and I wish all the functionality were back under the same product."
"The interface is really helpful for technical people, but it is not user-friendly."
"It is highly scalable, but there is a limitation that it is only available on Cisco devices."
"It is not so easy to use and configure. It needs a bunch of further resources to work, which is mainly the biggest downside of it. The deployment is huge."
"The multi-tenancy, redundancy, backup and restore functionalities, as well as the monitoring aspects of the solution, need improvement. The solution offers virtually no enterprise-grade possibility for monitoring."
"The emailed notifications are either hard to find or they are not available. Search capabilities can be improved."
"It might be nice to have more AI in the future."
"I want to see the solution expand to more than just the network, for example, perhaps it could provide some VLAN technologies."
"The solution could improve by having a more streamlined setup."
"The price could be better. The non-enterprise version of the product should also be improved. I would like VMware to expand beyond the network and provide some VLAN technologies and more. I think we have one, but it's more on the distribution side because it's more on the upper side of the network. I'm looking forward to that."
"The solution is only sold as part of a bundle and not as an individual product."
"Despite being somewhat behind in the cybersecurity field, VMware should develop a cloud and a red team to continuously monitor for new malware and ransomware."
"There were some issues with finance and other accounting."
"It needs to be cheaper."
Cisco Secure Workload is ranked 9th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 13 reviews while VMware NSX is ranked 1st in Cloud and Data Center Security with 93 reviews. Cisco Secure Workload is rated 8.4, while VMware NSX is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Workload writes "A solution that provides good technical support but its high cost makes it challenging for users to adopt it". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware NSX writes "Allows for seamless micro-segmentation and the support is exceptional". Cisco Secure Workload is most compared with Illumio, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Cisco ACI and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), whereas VMware NSX is most compared with Nutanix Flow Network Security, Illumio, Cisco ACI, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Cisco DNA Center. See our Cisco Secure Workload vs. VMware NSX report.
See our list of best Cloud and Data Center Security vendors and best Microsegmentation Software vendors.
We monitor all Cloud and Data Center Security 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.