We performed a comparison between Cisco FabricPath and HPE ProCurve based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two LAN Switching solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the central management where the customer can receive all the alerts."
"The solution has excellent stability."
"The setup is straightforward."
"Cisco is the market leader in this space and it is a product that I recommend."
"The most valuable features are the lead time and the high quality of the product."
"Cisco FabricPath is highly beneficial for network performance and relatively easy to implement. It also offers straightforward monitoring capabilities."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to migrate VMs between data centers."
"HPE ProCurve's most valuable feature is that it is user-friendly."
"It has an excellent menu system where you can use both the CLI and a menu system and the GUI version. They have three options for manipulating, updating, and changing the switch, which we like."
"Inter-VLAN is a great feature."
"The most valuable features are the price and the warranty."
"HPE ProCurve is used to connect servers and storage in the data center."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The web page interface is very convenient and easy to use for setting up your feedback loops."
"The product is robust."
"The management features are in need of improvement."
"Lack of security features for which we need to use another solution."
"The product lacks AI...The initial setup of Cisco FabricPath was a bit complex."
"While Cisco products are excellent, the problem is the cost. Cisco products are product, Cisco products are very expensive. I rate Cisco FabricPath three out of 10 for affordability."
"Layer 3 does not have higher availability."
"The cloud version of Cisco Fabric Path could be improved."
"The documents could improve for Cisco FabricPath. There are times when the relevant information is not present in the different sections of the documents, such as deployment. The documents should be more detailed and enhanced."
"If Cisco can include management for this protocol in Layer 3, that would be ideal."
"These switches can be made more stable and robust."
"There should be faster interfaces on the switch, such as 25 gigabits."
"I would like to see integration with HPE OneView."
"An area for improvement in HPE ProCurve is the web interface not being as robust because you still have to go to the COI to make modifications or look at the exact configuration."
"The pricing model could be improved in HPE ProCurve."
"If you make a change and you disconnect yourself from the switch, you will create an issue."
"If we're aiming for an improvement, focus on enhancing security features in HPE ProCurve, particularly in terms of filtering."
"The interface we have could be better."
Cisco FabricPath is ranked 7th in LAN Switching with 23 reviews while HPE ProCurve is ranked 2nd in LAN Switching with 37 reviews. Cisco FabricPath is rated 8.2, while HPE ProCurve is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco FabricPath writes "Makes multi-layer networking easy and increases network efficiency". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE ProCurve writes "Offers reliability and helps with vulnerability assessment". Cisco FabricPath is most compared with Juniper QFabric and Cisco Nexus, whereas HPE ProCurve is most compared with Cisco Catalyst Switches, Aruba Instant On Switches, Dell PowerConnect Switches, NETGEAR Switches and Cisco Nexus. See our Cisco FabricPath vs. HPE ProCurve report.
See our list of best LAN Switching vendors.
We monitor all LAN Switching 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.