• Home
  • Cisco MDS Series vs. IBM SAN768B

Cisco MDS Series vs IBM SAN768B comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Cisco Logo

Cisco MDS Series

Read 8 Cisco MDS Series reviews
1,033 views|709 comparisons
77% willing to recommend
IBM Logo

IBM SAN768B

18 views|11 comparisons
Featured Review
Anonymous User
Good zoning, stable, scalable, and the support is good
Data Center Network Manager is good but it is not free and requires purchasing a separate license. It doesn't make sense to me - if you buy the... Read more →
Use IBM SAN768B?
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "It's perpetual licensing and maintenance is a recurrent cost."
  • "The price of the Cisco MDS Series is high."
  • "Pricing cannot be considered an advantageous trait of the solution since it is expensive. I rate the solution's pricing a three out of ten."

    • More Cisco MDS Series Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    report
    See Which Vendors Are Best For You
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise SAN solutions are best for your needs.
    See Recommendations
    767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    What do you like most about Cisco MDS Series?
    Top Answer:The product is easy to use.
    Read all 6 answers   →
    What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco MDS Series?
    Top Answer:We pay a yearly subscription fee.
    Read all 5 answers   →
    What needs improvement with Cisco MDS Series?
    Top Answer:The product is very expensive.
    Read all 6 answers   →
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Ranking
    1st
    out of 15 in Enterprise SAN
    Views
    1,033
    Comparisons
    709
    Reviews
    5
    Average Words per Review
    340
    Rating
    8.8
    14th
    out of 15 in Enterprise SAN
    Views
    18
    Comparisons
    11
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Cisco MDS 9100, Cisco MDS 9222i, Cisco MDS 9700
    SAN768B
    Learn More
    Cisco
    IBM
    Overview

    Cisco MDS 9000 Series Switches have met and often exceeded the demanding requirements for storage area networks for more than a decade. They offer a combination of performance, non-stop operations, and multiprotocol flexibility.

    IBM System Storage SAN768B fabric backbones is a Fibre Channel switching infrastructure offerings that provide the foundation for reliable, scalable, high-performance storage. The System Storage SAN b-type family switch leverages Gen 5 Fibre Channel and Fabric Vision technology to deliver long-term solutions for mission-critical applications that require secure, high-performance, low-latency storage networks.
    Sample Customers
    National Rugby League
    Einstein Healthcare, Hansgrohe SE, Yaap Digital Services
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company24%
    Financial Services Firm12%
    Government10%
    Healthcare Company9%
    No Data Available
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business50%
    Large Enterprise50%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business29%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise63%
    No Data Available

    Cisco MDS Series is ranked 1st in Enterprise SAN with 8 reviews while IBM SAN768B is ranked 14th in Enterprise SAN. Cisco MDS Series is rated 9.0, while IBM SAN768B is rated 0.0. The top reviewer of Cisco MDS Series writes "Simple deployment, reliable, and scales well". On the other hand, Cisco MDS Series is most compared with Dell Connectrix, HPE SN6000, IBM SAN384B, Pure Storage FlashArray and Dell PowerVault, whereas IBM SAN768B is most compared with .

    See our list of best Enterprise SAN vendors.

    We monitor all Enterprise SAN 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.