We performed a comparison between Cisco Ethernet Switches and HPE Ethernet Switches based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Ethernet Switches solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."One valuable feature is that you can string a number of switches together, and the fact that there are various methods to connect them, such as by stacking."
"It is easy to configure and troubleshoot."
"The greatest advantage of Cisco switches is their reliability. For example, we bought some 500 series switches back in 2002 or 2003, and they ran 24/7. I never had an issue for seven years."
"The initial setup was for Cisco Ethernet Switches was straightforward."
"The tool is easy to use, offering numerous options in terms of server connection."
"This is a great solution for network switching and security."
"The most valuable feature is that we create a network as a villain."
"The most valuable feature is the complete functionality, but the most important thing is support."
"It's stable and performing well."
"The main features of the solution I have found to be the interface and unique features other solutions do not have. Additionally, they have a lifetime warranty on the hardware."
"The product's stacking technology is stable and works well."
"We use HPE Ethernet Switches to provide solutions for the hotel, their guests, and IPTV."
"The HPE Ethernet switches have very low latency."
"The solution can scale."
"The most valuable feature is the IRF."
"It is a stable product."
"Switches should be made stackable, even if they are not of the same model."
"I think the price should be cheaper to be able to afford more."
"I don't like that you have to have a license of 10 years to use the switch. I don't understand that policy."
"If we can have fewer bugs on our switches, that would be great. We had bugs that caused the switch to reboot. There is probably a problem with the software."
"I haven't heard from my engineers that they said it's excellent."
"An area for improvement in Cisco Ethernet Switches is its command-line interface. It works differently than expected if you want to do some implementation. However, it works if it's a simple integration."
"From a system integrator's perspective, Cisco must train system integrators, partners, and customers about their services."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"The product could always use better technical support."
"The tool should be more stable."
"HPE Ethernet Switches must ensure that the updates and patching are done regularly. When we have new software updates, we can resolve issues quickly."
"Configuration can be complex."
"The pricing could be lowered."
"It would be better if they improve the implementation of SD-WAN."
"Installation could be made more secure."
"The scalability is limited."
Cisco Ethernet Switches is ranked 1st in Ethernet Switches with 128 reviews while HPE Ethernet Switches is ranked 10th in Ethernet Switches with 94 reviews. Cisco Ethernet Switches is rated 8.6, while HPE Ethernet Switches is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Ethernet Switches writes "It's a solidly stable product from a leader in the field". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE Ethernet Switches writes "They're solid and can last for up to 15 years". Cisco Ethernet Switches is most compared with Aruba Switches, Fortinet FortiSwitch - Secure Access, D-Link Ethernet Switches and Ubiquiti UniFi Switches, whereas HPE Ethernet Switches is most compared with Ubiquiti UniFi Switches, H3C Ethernet Switches, Juniper EX Series Ethernet Switches, Meraki MS Switches and D-Link Ethernet Switches. See our Cisco Ethernet Switches vs. HPE Ethernet Switches report.
See our list of best Ethernet Switches vendors.
We monitor all Ethernet Switches 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.
Have to agree with Durrell on the Cisco offerings and certifications. I would say Avaya is more on VoIP capability and have not heard about their switch portfolio. For HP networking, they are on par with Cisco. In terms of capability and support, I would say Cisco is there.
Have you used any other vendors in the Ethernet Switch market?
Answer: Yes, I have used Arista Networks as well.
Have to agree with Durrell, while the equipment and support performs better than the competitors in my opinion, the shear volume of training that has been put out by Cisco has made it the leader. Other providers offer training of course, but none are as comprehensive and well known as the Cisco offerings..they have become THE standard for networking.
Hi,
Cisco simply has very well working equipment and it's a huge company which has gold reserves bigger than fort knox :)
I've used enterasys, juniper, noname and 3com switches, everyone has its advantages but cisco was what I liked most. Simply does its work and there is no place for failure. Only thing you need is vacuum machine from time to time.
The emphasis that has been put on certifications is the biggest reason these vendors are not taking up a bigger share of the market. The industry standards for networking certs are the Cisco ones. Since the certs are catered to their equipment, it just makes sense that they have such a huge market share.
For price/performance, I think HP and Juniper offer more than Cisco. HP typically comes in at a much lower cost for comparable features and throughput, and their switches have been very reliable for me. Juniper switches are similarly priced to Cisco gear, but they usually offer a much wider range of functions, along with equal or better performance.
All of the reasons Nuno listed, above, are valid. In addition:
4. High Performance - On balance, for most classes of switch, Cisco gear performs better. I've had great experience with HP Procurve switches, and their price/performance has been very good. But once in a while, they couldn't keep up with demanding traffic, like iSCSI, and we had to go back to Cisco gear.
5. OEM Testing and Validation - If you're introducing new network gear - firewalls, storage, servers, etc. - you will make sure it works with Cisco switches because the installed base is huge. This is a vicious cycle - more Cisco interoperability and validation means fewer issues with Cisco gear.
I have used Netgear and 3com switches.
I have tried a few other vendors on the Ethernet switch market, especially HP, Huawei and SMC switches. Haven’t used Alcatel personally, but have had interesting feedback for them from colleagues.
Regarding Cisco however, I believe there are three main reasons for it:
1) Integration on the “cisco environment”, with a structured offer from basic switches, up to multi-layer equipment, allowing a consistent platform all through the enterprise.
2) Management interface – ranging from graphic management (through local web interface, CiscoWorks modules, etc.), to CLI, with the Cisco IOS, provides great flexibility for remote management, configuration backup, and monitoring.
3) Expertise of in-house personnel – Both the training provided by Cisco itself, and the fact that Cisco has a strong base for the remaining network infrastructure (routers, and other network devices).
There is also the issue that, sometimes, some mixed vendor environment can bring issues with 802.1q trunking (I’ve seen issues with HP Switches while having problems with a VLAN 1 on the HP mixing with a native VLAN on Cisco for instance…), and other proprietary protocols (CDP for instance) that can have implications with the way management or configuration is done…
Also, in some cases, the use of other technologies that cisco has brought along over the years – Network access control, that interfaces with Cisco switches for instance, and the buildup of different interactions with other technologies, ends up creating a technical barrier on top of the barrier for change on things like:
“our other 30 switches are Cisco, and now I’ll place another vendor one?”.
And on that question, price is not likely to be the most important factor, but TCO, existing expertise, and applications running on the network (that need QoS for instance), and integration with existing monitoring, configuration management, and infrastructure, may be the most important factor on the decision…