We performed a comparison between Portnox CORE and Ruckus Cloudpath based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Access Control (NAC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's a stable product."
"I am impressed with the solution's voucher capability and authentication. The tool is integrated with Active Direct storage."
"There is an add-on feature for application control to kill unwanted applications when launched on a user's device."
"This is a self-sufficient network monitoring and security product that saves time and employee resources."
"The most important feature is that this solution is agentless. So, you don't have to install any agents on endpoints."
"The technical support is top-notch."
"The Vidahost feature is currently in action, and it appears to be providing valuable data insights."
"The product is a valuable solution within zero-trust architecture, enhancing network security and visibility."
"I find the solution to be very rich in features."
"Ruckus technical support is very good and helpful whenever we need them."
"The ease of use is great, and the automation wizards can do a lot."
"The solution has good features for authentication, policies, and allowing users to self-provision devices for network access via their logins."
"The solution is easy to use, well designed, robust, and has good traffic capacity."
"The tool's most valuable features include the phenomenal functionality of DPSK. The ease of use, particularly when it is correctly set up, is remarkably simple. Tracking users is straightforward and dynamic. This allows us to identify where a user might encounter issues within the process."
"It could be a little cheaper."
"The price could be better."
"Portnox CORE can improve on support for unmanaged switches (or hubs) and other brands of network devices. These kinds of devices are still in use in organisations, especially SMEs who cannot afford to buy a managed switch."
"Now, the way security is viewed, maybe including something like AI, to automate some of the things that are required to be done would be great."
"The licensing is based on a per-port price, even when you are not using all of the ports, and this is something that could be improved."
"It would be good to integrate Portnox CORE with CLEAR."
"The product should consider more integration with vendors like Huawei. It should also improve visibility. The solution should offer a partner portal that can provide customers training on the in and out of the solution."
"We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitations with CORE."
"The solution could improve by adding more detailed information that customers have available on the dashboards."
"I believe the solution is missing some great features which are present in other solutions like Aruba, UiPath, and Cisco ISE."
"The scalability could be better."
"The hardest part we've had to deal with is trying to find some physical product recently as everything is going like hotcakes."
"The setup process is a bit complex."
"The tool needs to support multi-vendor environments. Currently, my experience with it has been primarily within Ruckus environments. However, I haven't explored it for multi-vendor scenarios. It would be great to see newer builds that are multi-vendor capable of full integration."
Portnox CORE is ranked 12th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 14 reviews while Ruckus Cloudpath is ranked 10th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 6 reviews. Portnox CORE is rated 8.2, while Ruckus Cloudpath is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Portnox CORE writes "Simple UI, easy deployment but slow authentication times for devices". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ruckus Cloudpath writes "Helps to onboard corporate users based on certificate-based authentication". Portnox CORE is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform and Portnox Clear, whereas Ruckus Cloudpath is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC and Sophos Network Access Control. See our Portnox CORE vs. Ruckus Cloudpath report.
See our list of best Network Access Control (NAC) vendors.
We monitor all Network Access Control (NAC) 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.
