We performed a comparison between Cisco Ethernet Switches and HPE Ethernet Switches based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Ethernet Switches solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is basically issue-free."
"Cisco Ethernet Switches are pretty reliable, and I have rarely seen one of them break."
"One of the most valuable aspects of Cisco Ethernet Switches is many engineers can work on the equipment. You can find qualified engineers that can configure Cisco equipment more than any other networking equipment."
"It is easy to configure and troubleshoot."
"The most valuable feature is the complete functionality, but the most important thing is support."
"I have found the solution to have good scalability. Cisco is the pioneers on switching technology, they are very good."
"We don't need any support from Cisco since there are a lot of materials and training about Cisco available online. I feel Cisco's support is good."
"The solution is compatible with many brands, such as VMware."
"he stability is very good on this solution. There have been no bugs, glitches or crashes."
"Switching to HPE Ethernet Switches greatly improved our network. We used to have both Cisco and HPE Ethernet Switches. Our network performance has increased by 300 percent."
"It's fairly lightweight, they don't require a lot of maintenance."
"The switches are very important in our hospitals, which is a critical environment for our patients. They provide time-effective management and meet our needs."
"HPE is very reliable because it has a lifetime warranty, so the switches didn't give us any problems."
"We were able to onboard HPE Ethernet Switches easily to the cloud. It was fast and took only five minutes to complete."
"We can easily replace components without incurring significant costs in an error or failure."
"The most valuable product is the unmanaged HP switch."
"Cisco has a lot of propriety protocols compared to other products, such as Arista Networks."
"The current state of Cisco Ethernet Switches leaves room for improvement, particularly in regard to central management and security. While they possess the capability to function as owners of Layer Two, they fall short in regard to security awareness. While there are some supplementary products available that can provide additional security measures, such as the deployment of virtual machines, these solutions are external and not integrated within the switch itself. For this reason, Cisco Ethernet switches could benefit from incorporating the same centralized management and security features as other companies, such as Fortinet, offer in their FortiSwitches. By being aware of potential threats such as MAC spoofing and ARP poisoning, the switch can provide a more comprehensive level of security."
"Network setup is quite complicated, particularly if you're implementing in a non-technical environment."
"One thing we did have to work around is, on the broadcast side, we're reliant on the PTP protocol, precision time protocol, and the Cisco switches in general, don't support that."
"The high price of the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The installation is difficult and requires further training documentations."
"The price of the solution could be reduced."
"Cisco can improve its stability for the BGP protocol. It is not stable while recalculating the BGP table. Its price should also be improved. It is very expensive."
"We have some problems with the performance of our HPE Ethernet Switches because they are old."
"The solution is very comparable to Huawei, however, it could be more scalable. Huawei is easier to scale."
"When we have a lot of clients on the system, we lose signal and have to restart our antenna."
"The management of the tool must be improved."
"This solution needs to support software-defined networking."
"They should continue to work on new features."
"The pricing could be lowered."
"A lower price would be an improvement because we always want to reduce our costs."
Cisco Ethernet Switches is ranked 1st in Ethernet Switches with 128 reviews while HPE Ethernet Switches is ranked 10th in Ethernet Switches with 96 reviews. Cisco Ethernet Switches is rated 8.6, while HPE Ethernet Switches is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Ethernet Switches writes "It's a solidly stable product from a leader in the field". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE Ethernet Switches writes "Allows to monitor all the switches online so we can see what is happening and offers good security features ". Cisco Ethernet Switches is most compared with Aruba Switches, Fortinet FortiSwitch - Secure Access, D-Link Ethernet Switches and Ubiquiti UniFi Switches, whereas HPE Ethernet Switches is most compared with Ubiquiti UniFi Switches, H3C Ethernet Switches, Juniper EX Series Ethernet Switches, Meraki MS Switches and Huawei Ethernet Switches. See our Cisco Ethernet Switches vs. HPE Ethernet Switches report.
See our list of best Ethernet Switches vendors.
We monitor all Ethernet Switches 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.
Have to agree with Durrell on the Cisco offerings and certifications. I would say Avaya is more on VoIP capability and have not heard about their switch portfolio. For HP networking, they are on par with Cisco. In terms of capability and support, I would say Cisco is there.
Have you used any other vendors in the Ethernet Switch market?
Answer: Yes, I have used Arista Networks as well.
Have to agree with Durrell, while the equipment and support performs better than the competitors in my opinion, the shear volume of training that has been put out by Cisco has made it the leader. Other providers offer training of course, but none are as comprehensive and well known as the Cisco offerings..they have become THE standard for networking.
Hi,
Cisco simply has very well working equipment and it's a huge company which has gold reserves bigger than fort knox :)
I've used enterasys, juniper, noname and 3com switches, everyone has its advantages but cisco was what I liked most. Simply does its work and there is no place for failure. Only thing you need is vacuum machine from time to time.
The emphasis that has been put on certifications is the biggest reason these vendors are not taking up a bigger share of the market. The industry standards for networking certs are the Cisco ones. Since the certs are catered to their equipment, it just makes sense that they have such a huge market share.
For price/performance, I think HP and Juniper offer more than Cisco. HP typically comes in at a much lower cost for comparable features and throughput, and their switches have been very reliable for me. Juniper switches are similarly priced to Cisco gear, but they usually offer a much wider range of functions, along with equal or better performance.
All of the reasons Nuno listed, above, are valid. In addition:
4. High Performance - On balance, for most classes of switch, Cisco gear performs better. I've had great experience with HP Procurve switches, and their price/performance has been very good. But once in a while, they couldn't keep up with demanding traffic, like iSCSI, and we had to go back to Cisco gear.
5. OEM Testing and Validation - If you're introducing new network gear - firewalls, storage, servers, etc. - you will make sure it works with Cisco switches because the installed base is huge. This is a vicious cycle - more Cisco interoperability and validation means fewer issues with Cisco gear.
I have used Netgear and 3com switches.
I have tried a few other vendors on the Ethernet switch market, especially HP, Huawei and SMC switches. Haven’t used Alcatel personally, but have had interesting feedback for them from colleagues.
Regarding Cisco however, I believe there are three main reasons for it:
1) Integration on the “cisco environment”, with a structured offer from basic switches, up to multi-layer equipment, allowing a consistent platform all through the enterprise.
2) Management interface – ranging from graphic management (through local web interface, CiscoWorks modules, etc.), to CLI, with the Cisco IOS, provides great flexibility for remote management, configuration backup, and monitoring.
3) Expertise of in-house personnel – Both the training provided by Cisco itself, and the fact that Cisco has a strong base for the remaining network infrastructure (routers, and other network devices).
There is also the issue that, sometimes, some mixed vendor environment can bring issues with 802.1q trunking (I’ve seen issues with HP Switches while having problems with a VLAN 1 on the HP mixing with a native VLAN on Cisco for instance…), and other proprietary protocols (CDP for instance) that can have implications with the way management or configuration is done…
Also, in some cases, the use of other technologies that cisco has brought along over the years – Network access control, that interfaces with Cisco switches for instance, and the buildup of different interactions with other technologies, ends up creating a technical barrier on top of the barrier for change on things like:
“our other 30 switches are Cisco, and now I’ll place another vendor one?”.
And on that question, price is not likely to be the most important factor, but TCO, existing expertise, and applications running on the network (that need QoS for instance), and integration with existing monitoring, configuration management, and infrastructure, may be the most important factor on the decision…