We performed a comparison between Cisco Catalyst Switches and Dell PowerConnect Switches based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Users feel Cisco Catalyst Switches provide great stability, intuitive reliable analytics, seamless scalability, excellent PoE capabilities, and solid robust security. However, users are happier with the pricing of Dell PowerConnect Switches.
"Mostly the LAN switching is the most valuable aspect of the solution."
"The availability of resources for learning about the product and doing evaluation of any issues is excellent."
"There is a lot of improvement in the network segment after replacing the older switches. I have not seen any kind of issue with these switches since deployment. They are pretty much stable."
"Its implementation is quite simple as there's good documentation you can reference."
"I think it is a reliable and scalable solution."
"I find their system throughput and Cisco support very useful."
"Catalyst switches are highly reliable. They have a good product life, they are balanced overall compared to others."
"The most valuable feature is load balancing."
"Dell PowerConnect Switches are easy to configure."
"This solution comes with a lifetime warranty."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The most valuable features are the jumbo frames and the stacking."
"Their support has been excellent, and it has been quite stable and easy to set up."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to multitask."
"When the price is competitive the customers tend to choose the cheaper brand and then look at the features. So having a competitive price is a plus."
"Dell PowerConnect Switches have a VTL feature similar to Cisco's VSS. With VTL, using this technology, you can cluster two switches together to increase redundancy in the environment."
"We have configurations for port channels between two facilities, and we cannot communicate between these two buildings. An SFP configuration uses one wire to send and receive the signal. It's opt-in. We cannot use it after the upgrade. What can we do in this situation? We already bought it."
"While it is scalable, it could be better."
"The newer models are not so stable. Other products like 6800, 3750, were stable but starting from 3850 it got worse. We have a lot of issues and a lot of bugs. It's a new product so it's understandable but it should be improved."
"Cisco is weird about their pricing models, so that's one problem. Their operating system is also a little outdated."
"The product could offer more integrations with other solutions."
"If they worked on lowering the price, they would be able to attract more customers."
"Cisco should work to lower its costs. It's quite expensive right now."
"I would like to see a graphical user interface for the configuration."
"What's lacking in Dell PowerConnect Switches is SD-WAN integration, and this is what needs to be improved in it. All enterprises now move towards SD-WAN infrastructure, and because Dell PowerConnect Switches don't currently support SD-WAN, the product would be replaced, considered a secondary switch, or linked up to a different switch. Integration or support for SD-WAN is what I'd like to see in the next version of Dell PowerConnect Switches."
"The CLI for Dell PowerConnect Switches is sometimes confusing, especially with the LAN, but for the GUI it is simple."
"Their hardware is not reliable, it's faulty."
"There should be more port options in this switch. Currently, it has 24 or 48 ports. However, some of our customers require only 8 ports, but I have to put a switch with 24 ports. They should provide smaller solutions and complimentary access point for companies like ours with a low quantity of work. The main issue with this product is branding. They should improve their branding and promote their brand more in Mexico. Customers are more aware of brands like Cisco as compared to Dell."
"An area for improvement would be that it's very hard to configure if you're not familiar with the UI or CLI of the product. The UI itself could also be improved."
"I expect it to be a zero-touch or a plug-and-play device. To some extent, it is, but we need to know the architecture, and we need to know what exactly we are doing. It is not so easy to implement. It depends on what exactly we are doing and it is still not a plug-and-play or zero-touch device. In the upcoming version, they can make it zero-touch, where we can just power it on and start using it. They can have some templates for different scenarios, such as when you are using it for the data center or adding it to your existing infrastructure."
"When it comes to the configuration, there should be documentation and interactive help available to assist people who have experience with products from other vendors."
"The product needs to improve in terms of reports and backups."
Cisco Catalyst Switches is ranked 1st in LAN Switching with 171 reviews while Dell PowerConnect Switches is ranked 3rd in LAN Switching with 30 reviews. Cisco Catalyst Switches is rated 8.6, while Dell PowerConnect Switches is rated 8.0. 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 Dell PowerConnect Switches writes "Excellent support, good pricing, and easy setup". Cisco Catalyst Switches is most compared with Arista Networks Platform, Cisco Nexus, HPE ProCurve, ExtremeSwitching and Aruba Instant On Switches, whereas Dell PowerConnect Switches is most compared with Cisco Nexus, HPE ProCurve, NETGEAR Switches, Arista Networks Platform and Dell PowerSwitch N-Series. See our Cisco Catalyst Switches vs. Dell PowerConnect Switches report.
See our list of best LAN Switching vendors and best Data Center Networking 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.