We performed a comparison between Cisco FabricPath 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."The technical support we get from Cisco is excellent. It's the best in the industry. We're more than satisfied with the level of service they provide."
"The setup is straightforward."
"The most valuable features are the security, web control, and traffic control."
"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."
"FabricPath's best features are routing, OSPS, ethernet, and performance."
"Cisco is the market leader in this space and it is a product that I recommend."
"The technical assistance is good."
"Additional bandwidth is available when needed."
"The 40 gig backbone InterConneX was valuable for our use case. It is even faster now. QFabric has spine-leaf technology or topology, which basically makes every single hop only one hop away in terms of connecting from one device to another. It is a pretty good and robust solution. It works pretty well in terms of scalability, and their technical support is amazing."
"The most valuable feature of QFabric for network performance is its stability."
"It's user-friendly."
"Juniper QFabric has various advantages including scalability, simplicity, performance, and flexibility."
"It is known for being agile, flexible, and cost-effective when working with various vendors."
"The solution is easy to use and has good performance."
"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 vendor maintains the product well."
"In terms of the series, I find that the integration with other teleconferencing applications needs to be more seamless. I have suggested to Cisco that the endpoint device should allow joining calls from Microsoft Teams, Zoom, and other teleconferencing applications. Additionally, I appreciate the recent inclusion of breakout sessions in the Cisco Webex application, which enhances its relevance in the networking field."
"The solution is costly."
"Cisco FabricPath's pricing is expensive."
"The pricing could be adjusted to make it easier to sell to clients."
"The initial setup is a little 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."
"I would like to see better interoperability with other IT solutions."
"Lacks sufficient integration with SIEM."
"The pricing structure could be more budget-friendly."
"They are working on the virtualization of the actual fabric layer. They are moving away from the original spine-leaf design to a different infrastructure. Instead of having three tiers, which was the director of the interconnected nodes, they cut them back, and they still have that kind of structure."
"It works too much on rebooting and there is some memory leakage."
"The disruptive upgrade was an issue for us."
"Improvements could be made to QFabric's life cycle management, particularly in maintaining stable versions and extending product support."
"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."
Cisco FabricPath is ranked 8th in LAN Switching with 23 reviews while Juniper QFabric is ranked 9th in LAN Switching with 10 reviews. Cisco FabricPath is rated 8.2, while Juniper QFabric 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 Juniper QFabric writes "Performs well, is easy to set up, and the vendor maintains the product well". Cisco FabricPath is most compared with Cisco Nexus, whereas Juniper QFabric is most compared with Cisco Nexus. See our Cisco FabricPath 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.