We performed a comparison between Cisco DNA Center and VMware NSX based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The monitoring features are very useful for network engineers."
"Cisco DNA Center is a user-friendly solution."
"The most valuable features of Cisco DNA Center are wireless assurance and visibility."
"Cisco DNA Center provides operational support, compliance support, security vulnerability detection, and automatic scheduling."
"It is simple to manage and it is all done from a single dashboard."
"It enables monitoring of various components such as access points, switch cards, and other elements within the company's solutions."
"The product offers an intuitive and automated way to manage user networks. It gives me an insight into the network health."
"The product gives a consolidated view."
"The organization of it is logical, useful, and intuitive."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with the firewall."
"Over the last two years, they've enhanced a lot, especially in regard to integration with OpenStack."
"The we can actually extend Layer 2 networking across datacenters, and also Layer 3 networking, which comes along with it."
"It does have capabilities of micro-segmenting a network, being able to create smaller segments of various types of applications separated by various tiers."
"We are happy with the scalability."
"Some of the key features I find most valuable are the highly graphical user interface, virtualization of networks, and Microsoft application compatibility. It has all the functionality that we require."
"The Distributed firewall is simple to add to the network and rules are easy to implement."
"Cisco DNA Center was a new technology for us, at the beginning, it was not easy to do, but Cisco did a lot of training with us to a level we could handle everything. The team is managing itself now without the assistance of Cisco."
"The network, data center, and SD-WAN are all being treated as different services, but I would like to have only one solution to manage all of them."
"An area for improvement in Cisco DNA Center is the latency in data correlation. For example, sometimes, when an issue happens, and I check the logs, I can't find the corresponding log. There's a delay in log replication, so this is what needs improvement in Cisco DNA Center. Reporting in Cisco DNA Center could also be improved because it only has a few templates, and you can't customize it based on your requirements. There aren't many options available in Cisco DNA Center regarding reporting, versus Cisco Prime, which has excellent features for different levels of detailed reports. I'd like to see real-time data replication in the next release of Cisco DNA Center, similar to what's done in Meraki. Data in Meraki is real-time with no delay, so data is immediately replicated in the cloud. Currently, there's a lag in Cisco DNA Center, and addressing that lag is the enhancement I'd like to see in Cisco DNA Center. The solution also needs to be more user-friendly."
"We encountered issues with their response times, which had a big impact on our workflow."
"Technical support could be better. The price could be better, and it could be more stable."
"The product has many features that do not work properly."
"Integration with analytic tools and API integrations would be ideal."
"The product doesn’t have good monitoring capabilities."
"The setup is complex and should be made easier."
"Some configuration maximums are limiting to the user, especially when it comes to the deployment of very, very large environments."
"The engineering team has room for improvement. They should have have more of a Knowledge Base about different case studies and should develop more advanced features. These kinds of improvements will change the way things get done."
"It was stable for one year, there was no impact. In the last two months, we had two big incidents."
"It could be more user-friendly, but it's manageable. When we add a specific node to this particular NSX and the configuration changes, it won't push through the errors where required, but it'll accept it. However, while using it, we will have issues. It can also be more stable."
"Lacks integration with other solutions."
"It's a good product, but the way that it has got so many multiple levels that need to be purchased makes it expensive and cumbersome."
"In the next release, they should enhance the visual interface. With NSX-T, it's difficult to communicate between the public cloud and the container."
Cisco DNA Center is ranked 1st in Network Automation with 36 reviews while VMware NSX is ranked 4th in Network Automation with 93 reviews. Cisco DNA Center is rated 7.8, while VMware NSX is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco DNA Center writes "Practical implementation of VXLAN is good and provides centralized control". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware NSX writes "Allows for seamless micro-segmentation and the support is exceptional". Cisco DNA Center is most compared with Cisco Prime, Aruba Airwave, SolarWinds Network Configuration Manager, Huawei eSight and Meraki Dashboard, whereas VMware NSX is most compared with Nutanix Flow Network Security, Illumio, Cisco ACI, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Check Point CloudGuard Network Security. See our Cisco DNA Center vs. VMware NSX report.
See our list of best Network Automation vendors.
We monitor all Network Automation 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.
