We performed a comparison between Cisco SD-WAN and VMware NSX based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Fortinet, Check Point Software Technologies and others in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions."It has a very good GUI."
"The reliability is high and we have only had to restart it once or twice over the years."
"The initial setup is quite simple."
"Cisco products are rated to handle the heat and are very rugged, making them a good corporate standard."
"The most valuable features are zero-disk provisioning and link load balancing on an application basis."
"The first part that we like is that we can reuse certain hardware, which is a valuable asset. You can use hardware SKUs that already exist in the network. The second part that we like is the integration with the cloud and the measurement of the cloud's quality. These are the two values that this solution gives as compared to other implementations that we have seen."
"The solution sufficiently provides ISPs."
"Configuration interfaces are quite easy and intuitive. Being a part of the Cisco environment, Cisco SD-WAN is quite straightforward."
"NSX's stand-out function is the distributed firewall. The firewall system is just top-notch, and I haven't seen another solution like it."
"The security offered by VMware NSX is the most valuable, plus it's a feature-rich product that's straightforward to install and configure."
"Has a great firewall."
"The microsegmentation is a good feature. You can segment details, products, or hardware information."
"The performance is good."
"Overall, I would say the solution has been quite stable."
"We secured our organisation with Micro-segmentation."
"The most valuable feature of VMware NSX is the ease of use and its user friendly. For example, it is simple to change the subnet masks."
"I would like to see features related to security compliance, including a view of compliance with standards. With this, I should be able to do an audit of my network with SDWAN."
"We have had some problems with the licensing model, and it is something that should be improved."
"The bandwidth limitations would be good to remove, but it is a policy and license situation for Cisco because the cost is very high. It would be good to have OTP implemented with VRF. It can have support for EIGRP Over the Top (OTP) VRF. I saw some limitations in regards to the VRF protocol and the advertisement between VRF configuration. EIGRP Over the Top basically was quite limited with the VRF configuration. If you wanted to do rollback in VRF by using the EIGRP OTP protocol, the formation was not populated across. Cisco got back and confirmed that it is a configuration that I need to wait for until the next release, which is going to happen in one year. Cisco documentation is not the way it used to be before. It just gives an easy way to configure, but it doesn't go into the details of the configuration. The information that you need is there, but sometimes you want to go further and get more information, but the information is quite limited. It would be good to cover a few business cases or configuration cases. They used to be there in the past."
"One area for improvement in Cisco SD-WAN is reporting. The report needs to give more visibility to the customer. The security feature in Cisco SD-WAN also needs improvement, particularly if Cisco wants to challenge other brands, such as Fortinet."
"It is the best solution that I ever had, but there might be something better than this in the future."
"The solution could be more secure. Security is always a priority for us."
"Technical support could be more helpful and responsive."
"When you buy the equipment, they should already put it into your cloud account. It should already be set up so that we can manage with vBond. We came across an issue where it wasn't resolved in the DNS. We are using Umbrella, so we need to create a VPN IPSec tunnel to Umbrella to enable the users to browse. I would really like to see an internal built-in firewall so that we don't have to go to Umbrella. This functionality might already be there. We are quite new to this solution, and we are still learning about it."
"It takes time to do the initial setup. It is a bit slow, which is surprising."
"The setup of the solution could be simplified."
"If there are other solutions already in place, it can be difficult to implement."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"Their licensing model should make it easier to purchase licenses."
"Some configuration maximums are limiting to the user, especially when it comes to the deployment of very, very large environments."
"The solution could improve by having a more streamlined setup."
"The setup is complex and should be made easier."
Cisco SD-WAN is ranked 1st in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 86 reviews while VMware NSX is ranked 2nd in Network Virtualization with 94 reviews. Cisco SD-WAN is rated 8.0, while VMware NSX is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco SD-WAN writes "A solution for integrating services to enhance up-time, performance and lower costs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware NSX writes "Allows for seamless micro-segmentation and the support is exceptional". Cisco SD-WAN is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki SD-WAN, VMware SD-WAN, Juniper Session Smart Router and Aruba Orchestrator, whereas VMware NSX is most compared with Nutanix Flow Network Security, Illumio, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco ACI and Cisco Nexus.
We monitor all Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions 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.