MD.SIHAB TALUKDARSystem Engineer at a non-profit
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The support system that they have in place is very good and they are easy to reach."
"Scalability is not a problem."
"It has reduced the number of people on the network team along with the system engineer involved in the security process. So, it is valuable."
"From a distributed firewall perspective, it's a solid solution."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create, develop, and deploy servers in minutes to hours, rather than days."
"The most valuable features for us at this early stage are the interface and the integration with existing VMware solutions."
"The most valuable features are security and dynamic routing."
"This is the most scalable product of its type."
"From a security standpoint, the customer was able to better secure critical workloads while routing L2/L3 worked normally, giving them more confidence that they would be ready for any potential security incident mitigation or outage (DR)."
"The most valuable features are stability and low cost."
"It would be helpful if they offered modularized upgrades, such as additional memory or a faster processor."
"This is a software solution, which is less stable than a hardware solution by definition."
"We would to have a reverse proxy. This would add great value to the solution."
"We would like better integration with the standards on the market. For example, with OSPF, their integration in NSX is very low. It's not a full OSPF integration. It is too thin from a protocol perspective."
"It could be cheaper!"
"Everybody needs a network to connect to, and VMware doesn't readily provide one."
"I would like to see automation capabilities in the deployment process."
"The training costs a minimum of $3,000, which is expensive and should be reduced."
"Traffic flow introspection topology visibility is definitely needed because at the moment, NSX-T lacks in this area."
"There are always issues integrating with Cisco."
"There is a separate charge for support."
"We can't go without NSX, so it's invaluable from this perspective."
"The solution is very expensive."
"The licensing fees are expensive and we pay on a yearly basis."
"It is an expensive product, but cheaper than some competing solutions."
"The price of this product is too high."
"This solution requires a licence."
"VMware NSX is expensive and everything is licensed. We have to pay for each individual feature."
"The price is based on the virtual desktop infrastructure(VDI) side and also is dependant on the size of the environment. The price is expensive and it could attract more purchasers in smaller organisations if it was reduced."
Earn 20 points
Simplify operations and roll out new virtual network services in minutes on any platform.
Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization is ranked 3rd in Network Virtualization with 2 reviews while VMware NSX is ranked 1st in Network Virtualization with 20 reviews. Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization is rated 7.6, while VMware NSX is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization writes "A reliable solution with good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware NSX writes "Allows for seamless micro-segmentation and the support is exceptional". Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization is most compared with , whereas VMware NSX is most compared with Cisco ACI, Nutanix Flow, Cisco Secure Workload, Guardicore Centra and Cisco SD-WAN. See our Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization vs. VMware NSX report.
See our list of best Network Virtualization vendors.
We monitor all Network Virtualization 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.