Compare Cisco Nexus vs. Juniper QFabric

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Cisco Nexus Logo
5,265 views|3,569 comparisons
Juniper QFabric Logo
924 views|805 comparisons
Top Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Nexus vs. Juniper QFabric and other solutions. Updated: September 2021.
536,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"The initial setup is pretty easy.""I like the fact that they are a well-supported product.""Cisco Nexus meets all of our requirements.""Cisco is refining the features all the time and you can see this in all the different vendors.""The most valuable feature is performance.""It's easy to use, and the performance is great.""From a data center implementation, with respect to competition from your data, there isn't really a product recovery for the different tests other than Cisco Nexus. For example, if you take Multi-tenancy for the data center, it's something which, I think, only Cisco has. There are some implementation from HP, but I think it's limited there.""Its easy management is most valuable. It is easy to use, easy to manage, stable, and very reliable."

More Cisco Nexus Pros »

"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.""The solution is stable.""The solution is easy to use and has good performance.""It's user-friendly."

More Juniper QFabric Pros »

Cons
"The licensing is very complicated. They should work to simplify it.""I am looking for a GUI that goes alongside them and more SD-WAN built to their core switches.""I feel that this solution should be more flexible and scalable.""They could improve on having different technologies between product models.""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 price could be better.""One of the biggest challenges, which I see is that there's a constant evolution in the product. For example, our configuration is based on what is known as traditional data center implementation. Today there is the ACI deployment and to implement, to migrate from one technology to another, that's challenging both from a configuration perspective and also from a cost perspective.""The cost of the support can be improved. We had critical operations, and we needed 24/7 support for 365 days, which was quite expensive. We had to go for a very costly support contract, which was really a concern. The availability of spare parts, especially in a remote location such as Egypt, can also be improved."

More Cisco Nexus Cons »

"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 would be nice if Juniper provided the system integrator with training, similar to that of Cisco.""The disruptive upgrade was an issue for us."

More Juniper QFabric Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"I thought that it would be less expensive.""We use a local distributor for support, which is very expensive.""The price of the product is reasonable.""The Nexus 9000 is very competitively priced.""The problem with Cisco, from what I see, is that their costs are much higher.""Licensing is annual or every three years. We were one of the big customers, and we used to get good prices, but the cost of the support can be improved.""The solution is expensive.""We have a virtual license."

More Cisco Nexus Pricing and Cost Advice »

"In terms of price, the QFabric solution is going to be probably in the middle of the road for a fabric solution.""The price for Juniper QFabric could improve. There are subscription, maintenance, and add-on feature fees.""Juniper QFabric is a high-level solution but it could be less expensive.""The pricing is high."

More Juniper QFabric Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which LAN Switching solutions are best for your needs.
536,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The implementation process could be easier, which is something that should be improved.
Top Answer: 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… more »
Top Answer: In terms of price, the QFabric solution is going to be probably in the middle of the road for a fabric solution.
Top Answer: 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… more »
Ranking
3rd
out of 15 in LAN Switching
Views
5,265
Comparisons
3,569
Reviews
16
Average Words per Review
392
Rating
8.4
8th
out of 15 in LAN Switching
Views
924
Comparisons
805
Reviews
4
Average Words per Review
516
Rating
8.3
Comparisons
Also Known As
QFabric
Learn More
Overview
The Cisco Nexus family of switches is designed to meet the stringent requirements of the next-generation data center. Not simply bigger or faster, these switches offer the following characteristics: infrastructure that can be scaled cost-effectively and that helps you increase energy, budget, and resource efficiency, transport that can navigate the transition to 10 Gigabit Ethernet and unified fabric and can also handle architectural changes such as virtualization, Web 2.0 applications, and cloud computing and operational continuity to meet your need for an environment where system availability is assumed and maintenance windows are rare if not totally extinct.
Juniper QFabric System is composed of multiple components working together as a single switch to provide high-performance, any-to-any connectivity and management simplicity in the data center. The QFabric System flattens the entire data center network to a single tier where all access points are equal, eliminating the effects of network locality and making it the ideal network foundation for cloud-ready, virtualized data centers.The highly scalable QFabric System improves application performance with low latency and converged services in a nonblocking, lossless architecture that supports Layer 2, Layer 3, and Fibre Channel over Ethernet (FCoE) capabilities.
Offer
Learn more about Cisco Nexus
Learn more about Juniper QFabric
Sample Customers
Advanced Medical Transport, Banco de Guayaquil, Baylor Scott & White Health, BH Telecom, Bowling Green State University, Calligaris, Children's Hospital Colorado, City of Biel, Del Papa Distributing, Department of Justice, Dimension Data, Dualtec Cloud Builders, Electricity Authority of Cyprus, Grupo Industrial Saltillo (GIS), Hertz, K&L Gates , LightEdge, Lone Star College System, Management Science Associates, Mindtree, NBC Olympics, Quest, Sony Corporation, The Department of Education in Western Australia, Valley Proteins
MCB Bank
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider12%
Financial Services Firm12%
Government12%
Healthcare Company12%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider38%
Computer Software Company22%
Government6%
Manufacturing Company4%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider50%
Computer Software Company26%
Manufacturing Company4%
Government4%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business12%
Midsize Enterprise11%
Large Enterprise76%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Nexus vs. Juniper QFabric and other solutions. Updated: September 2021.
536,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Cisco Nexus is ranked 3rd in LAN Switching with 18 reviews while Juniper QFabric is ranked 8th in LAN Switching with 5 reviews. Cisco Nexus is rated 8.4, while Juniper QFabric is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Nexus writes "Performs well, good port flexibility, and scales out easily". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper QFabric writes "Highly stable, straightforward CLI, and integrates well". Cisco Nexus is most compared with Cisco Catalyst Switches, Arista Networks Platform, Dell PowerConnect Switches, Extreme VDX and VMware NSX, whereas Juniper QFabric is most compared with Cisco FabricPath, Dell PowerConnect Switches and Arista Campus LAN Switches. 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.