We compared Cisco Identity Services Engine and Fortinet FortiNA (ISE)C based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison of Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Cisco ISE seems to be the slightly superior solution because of its expansive integration capabilities.
"The live logs and live sessions for troubleshooting are the most valuable features because they provide a detailed report of any issues."
"The interface is pretty easy to use."
"When you push out the policy, it is able to populate the entire network at one time."
"The biggest value of ISE is that it can get so granular with gaming systems, versus IoT and BYOD."
"The solution cuts down on the repercussions of getting malware or ransomware."
"Cisco ISE integrates with everything else."
"Cisco ISE is a comprehensive solution that allows you to control access to network resources granularly based on policies."
"A lot of customers use a third party to manage their guest Wi-Fi. Cisco ISE presents the ability to bring that in-house so that customers can have full control over it, change the branding, and get extra telemetry from it and the user data. It works really well for our customers."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiNAC is compliance, which we can do with the clients and the endpoints on the network."
"The FortiNAC features I found the most valuable are security and the ability to consolidate wireless networks."
"All the features of Fortinet FortiNAC are valuable."
"The users say that FortiNAC is configurable and easy to use."
"The ease of deployment is valuable."
"Version 9.1 has been an improvement on previous versions. It's a good solution for SMB."
"The support responds to our queries within two to four hours."
"It is too complex. It should be easy to use. We are not such a big team. We only have three engineers to work with this, and we don't use all of the functionality of the product. Its range of functionality is too wide for us, and this is the reason why we are thinking of switching to a more simple product. We have shortlisted a Microsoft solution. We have a big footprint for Microsoft products, especially in security. As a global strategy, we try to leverage to the maximum what is possible around Microsoft."
"It could be less monolithic. It's one huge application, and it does everything under the sun, so it's hard to deal with and upgrade and manage."
"I'd like to see an easier way to upgrade to larger versions, as well as more best practices that are easier to locate on their support page."
"In a future release, I would like to see network access control. That is something that customers seem to be looking for."
"It does a good job of establishing trust for every access request. We have had a little bit of a challenge with profiling, but we are probably about 80% there."
"It would be helpful for us to know what needs to be deployed, configured, and what changes we need to make to our devices when we don't receive the specific login which is an indication of a lack of connection or incorrect configuration."
"I believe that Cisco can improve the way its policies are built because it's a little complex."
"The price here in Brazil is very expensive."
"Our users have been asking for simpler documentation and training materials to facilitate the deployment process."
"The training documentation needs to be more transparent."
"Integration is hard in Fortinet FortiNAC, but they are evolving and getting better. For example, with Cisco, Aruba, Huawei, and Extreme devices, Fortinet FortiNAC is working properly, but some other devices have problems."
"The product could be more user-friendly in terms of GUI."
"The reporting capability needs to be improved."
"The course content could be improved, it's not that simple to work through."
"One of the biggest issues with Fortinet FortiNAC is that it is not intuitive and has a high learning curve."
"FortiNAC could be more scalable."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 138 reviews while Fortinet FortiNAC is ranked 3rd in Network Access Control (NAC) with 44 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Fortinet FortiNAC is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) writes "Gives us that extra ability to assist the end user and make sure that we are making them happy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiNAC writes "I like the solution's native integration with other devices from the same vendor". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security, whereas Fortinet FortiNAC is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Forescout Platform, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, Fortinet FortiClient and Portnox CORE. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Fortinet FortiNAC 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.