We performed a comparison between Cisco Catalyst Switches and Juniper QFX Series Switches based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Center Networking solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The hardware and the security are the product's valuable features"
"These switches are flexible and user-friendly."
"The most valuable features include the redundancy one and the spanning tree."
"The ability to configure throughput is very flexible and improved the performance of our systems."
"Cisco comes with built-in software access for network devices."
"The 802.1X port security and other security features work well and help keep the network secure."
"It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Cisco Switches are more stable in terms of hardware and firmware, rather than Juniper Switches."
"It's really easy to replicate rules. It's the one that I've used; it was CLI-based. You can implement a large set of rules with CLI. You can just copy a script and add additional changes to the source and destination on the part. And so it's easy to do large zone-based rules."
"It's a stable solution."
"EVPN-VXLAN feature offers the most benefits."
"The most valuable features are the VxLAN and the EVPN."
"Juniper QFX Series Switches provide a good platform for all of our hardware and are easy to use."
"The QFX series is a good choice for large data centers, particularly for Spine-Leaf architectures."
"While it is scalable, it could be better."
"Cisco Catalyst Switches do not have an open architecture and you have to buy into the Cisco architecture to be able to use them."
"I would like to see the integration of the 2960 SX switched."
"The prices are high. It's more expensive than other similar options."
"We need to rely on other devices to provide management features."
"The security of the solution could be improved, it is really important to us."
"The only improvement I would like to see with Cisco Catalyst Switches is the pricing."
"The support is not the quickest."
"Integrating QFX switches was the first point of challenge."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model. It is too high."
"There have been some issues sometimes. When you upgrade the device, it doesn't come up. It gets stuck."
"The price could be cheaper."
"I faced issues with the deployment and upgrade. In the QFX5110 series, features like ISSU and DSSQ should be improved. Upgrades should be smoother."
Cisco Catalyst Switches is ranked 1st in Data Center Networking with 171 reviews while Juniper QFX Series Switches is ranked 5th in Data Center Networking with 6 reviews. Cisco Catalyst Switches is rated 8.6, while Juniper QFX Series Switches is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Catalyst Switches writes "Reliable and stable catalyst switch; can be easily installed". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper QFX Series Switches writes "Offers high port density, including 1/25G/40G/100G and 400 options upto 2 RU and lower power consumption and leverages Broadcom chipsets for enhanced performance". Cisco Catalyst Switches is most compared with Arista Networks Platform, Dell PowerConnect Switches, Cisco Nexus and HPE ProCurve, whereas Juniper QFX Series Switches is most compared with Cisco Nexus, PTX Series Routers and Juniper MX Series Universal Routing Platforms. See our Cisco Catalyst Switches vs. Juniper QFX Series Switches 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.
