We performed a comparison between Cisco Nexus 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."It's pretty easy to use and operates at high speed."
"The solution has introduced VPC, Virtual Port Channel, which allows for more redundancy and flexibility."
"Current flexibility and the opportunities for future planning and scaling make this product line an ultimate opportunity."
"Cisco Nexus has good overall reliability and configuration options. It is fairly straightforward to access the switching platforms."
"The most valuable features of the solution are capacity and scalability."
"The consolidation of all of the layer two ports into one rack is very valuable."
"This solution has given us the ability to use Cisco ISE for security."
"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."
"The solution is easy to use and has good performance."
"The vendor maintains the product well."
"It's user-friendly."
"QFabric supports redundancy and includes all of the enterprise and service provider features that customers would want in data center or service provider network."
"The most valuable feature of QFabric for network performance is its stability."
"Juniper QFabric has various advantages including scalability, simplicity, performance, and flexibility."
"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 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."
"I would like to see more granularity."
"There is always room for improvement."
"There's a couple of really bad incidents lately. Probably luck of the draw."
"There's been a little bit of bugginess in the code, but that happens."
"I would like to see more on-device programmability, as it seems to be lacking in this platform."
"There is an ongoing problem with the limitation of the TCAM table, which is that it doesn't have enough memory to allow you to be really granular with your policy."
"The initial setup of the Cisco Nexus platform takes a long time. It's a complex system because we have a lot of security layers."
"Data center access is stable and high speed but it is not compatible with Cisco's server hardware devices. The solution can be technically improved and can have features like automation, better visibility, better functionality, and cheap pricing."
"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."
"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."
"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."
Cisco Nexus is ranked 6th in LAN Switching with 101 reviews while Juniper QFabric is ranked 9th in LAN Switching with 10 reviews. Cisco Nexus is rated 8.4, while Juniper QFabric is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Nexus writes " Offer high performance capabilities and enables efficient data transmission and processing". 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 Nexus is most compared with Cisco Catalyst Switches, Juniper QFX Series Switches, Arista Networks Platform, Dell PowerConnect Switches and Aruba Instant On Switches, whereas Juniper QFabric is most compared with Cisco FabricPath. See our Cisco Nexus 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.