We performed a comparison between Cisco Nexus and Juniper QFabric 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."Solid product, communications and support from a well-known dependable company."
"A very solid and reliable solution."
"Current flexibility and the opportunities for future planning and scaling make this product line an ultimate opportunity."
"The most valuable feature is that it is high-density, ten-gig."
"The interface is easy to use. It is not much different from iOS, but you can use it on a larger scale in data centers."
"The most valuable features are the great performance, high availability and easy administration."
"The setup is straightforward. I'd like to see the firmware and code upgradability to be slightly more intuitive."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the power."
"It's user-friendly."
"The solution is stable."
"The vendor maintains the product well."
"It is known for being agile, flexible, and cost-effective when working with various vendors."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the fabric backplane having upwards of 160 GB of communication. It is a top-of-the-rack solution where you have your directors sitting in the main area and then you have your nodes expanded out to your multiple cabinets. It has a very good design and could be your server backbone."
"The most valuable feature of QFabric for network performance is its stability."
"The solution is easy to use and has good performance."
"Juniper QFabric has various advantages including scalability, simplicity, performance, and flexibility."
"As a device meant to lead the processes related to networking and troubleshooting, I feel both aspects can be described as areas with certain concerns where improvements are required."
"If we could get some more automation integrated into it, it would make it easier."
"Areas in which the solution have room for improvement are the interface, management, and reporting."
"I would like to see more on-device programmability, as it seems to be lacking in this platform."
"The GUI interface could be improved to make it more user friendly."
"The technical support for this solution needs to be improved."
"Technical support could be better."
"It would be ideal if there was better integration with various other platforms."
"Having support for all OpenFlow versions would be beneficial."
"It would be nice if Juniper provided the system integrator with training, similar to that of Cisco."
"The stability needs to be improved."
"I do not use GUI's very much for switch stacks. I am always in the CLI. However, I do know that Juniper in the past has lacked on their GUI's, but they have been working on it."
"It works too much on rebooting and there is some memory leakage."
"Improvements could be made to QFabric's life cycle management, particularly in maintaining stable versions and extending product support."
"The disruptive upgrade was an issue for us."
"The pricing structure could be more budget-friendly."
Cisco Nexus is ranked 6th in LAN Switching with 101 reviews while Juniper QFabric is ranked 9th in LAN Switching with 10 reviews. Cisco Nexus is rated 8.4, while Juniper QFabric is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Nexus writes " Offer high performance capabilities and enables efficient data transmission and processing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper QFabric writes "Performs well, is easy to set up, and the vendor maintains the product well". Cisco Nexus is most compared with Cisco Catalyst Switches, Juniper QFX Series Switches, Arista Networks Platform, Dell PowerConnect Switches and Aruba Instant On Switches, whereas Juniper QFabric is most compared with Cisco FabricPath. See our Cisco Nexus vs. Juniper QFabric 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.
