We performed a comparison between Arista Networks Platform and Cisco Nexus based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: In this comparison, the two products received similar ratings across all categories. However, users of Arista Networks Platform reported seeing an ROI while users of Cisco Nexus did not.
"The most valuable feature is the Linux shell, which is useful for troubleshooting or capturing traffic."
"Arista Networks Platform offers straightforward deployment, and has good features. Support for the platform is also good."
"We find the CloudVision switching feature of this solution really useful."
"It is very stable. It has good hardware and very stable code. It provides good value for its price. They are a very lean type of organization, so they are very responsive, and they're able to focus more on their platform versus having multiple products out there."
"The solution is very stable."
"The best part is the single operating system that they have. Regardless of your model, it's the same operating system functioning across the board, which means you don't have to worry about backward compatibilities between your older switches and the new ones that you deploy."
"I like the spine as a leaf model and low latency. The hardware is robust and meets expected latency in all environments, mainly if you belong to the media or trading industry. For multicast-based solutions, Arista is number one."
"The user-friendly policy manager lets us apply different controls for various user groups easily."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco Nexus is speed compared to what you would get from a Catalyst Series switch."
"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."
"We are a Cisco shop. This solution is better compared to other options."
"The consolidation of all of the layer two ports into one rack is very valuable."
"The most valuable feature of the 7700 series is probably the multi-context subset VRS, which lets you use multi-VRS, multi-context, and also VPC setup, where you have two logical devices that are still separate in terms of management planes, but have shared, virtual core channels."
"It has improved our organization because we have aggregated ports, we're able to put multiple agencies on the multiple different interfaces that we have going there. We're able to separate them out with the use of VLANs and whatnot."
"It provides a very flexible connection to a server. When you go into history and the VPC, it provides a very flexible connection from it. Once a server goes down I can instruct it easily. So the network actually keeps quality even if onsite it is down."
"We leverage Cisco DCNM a lot, which allows us to automate."
"I want the solution to include a unified controller."
"The stability of this solution needs to be improved as part of the next upgrade."
"An area for improvement in Arista Networks Platform is its integration, e.g. it needs to have more integration with its new products. Incorporating more security and cloud is also another area for improvement in the platform."
"The overall price of the Arista Networks Platform is expensive. It should be reduced."
"The solution’s pricing could be better."
"The intent-based networking management, together with the provider of these solutions that are already free, would be beneficial."
"The CVP management platform needs to be improved."
"The solution needs to accommodate new features."
"The only thing to improve is to continue to get better."
"The installation process lasted too long, taking 16 to 24 hours for full completion."
"In the next release of the solution, I would like to see varying integration between VRF (Virtual Routing and Forwarding) instances so we can integrate BGB into different VRFs in a more organized way. We have some issues with tunnels and VRFs."
"There is always room for improvement."
"I would like to see some development into the SAE world where you can virtualize. That would be the only thing I would like to see because I need to start virtualizing my infrastructure gear at some of the other data centers that I have."
"I would like to see more granularity."
"I am looking for a GUI that goes alongside them and more SD-WAN built to their core switches."
"I would like to see better collaboration with other, low-end devices."
Arista Networks Platform is ranked 2nd in Data Center Networking with 21 reviews while Cisco Nexus is ranked 3rd in Data Center Networking with 101 reviews. Arista Networks Platform is rated 8.6, while Cisco Nexus is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Arista Networks Platform writes "Affordable for enterprise-sized companies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Nexus writes " Offer high performance capabilities and enables efficient data transmission and processing". Arista Networks Platform is most compared with Cisco Catalyst Switches, Juniper EX Series Ethernet Switches, Aruba Switches, Cisco Ethernet Switches and Meraki MS Switches, whereas Cisco Nexus is most compared with Cisco Catalyst Switches, Juniper QFX Series Switches, Dell PowerConnect Switches, VMware NSX and Juniper QFabric. See our Arista Networks Platform vs. Cisco Nexus report.
See our list of best Data Center Networking vendors.
We monitor all Data Center Networking 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.
