We performed a comparison between Cisco Enterprise Routers and Juniper MX Series Routers based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Routers solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution has good performance."
"It's an ideal gateway solution for small and medium businesses, i.e., around 300 devices can be easily handled."
"They offer a variety of very good features."
"The solution is flexible."
"Cisco Routers are quite robust. They don't malfunction, and we've had no complaints so far."
"The commands are easy to understand."
"This product is easy to use."
"We appreciate that this solution performs well, regardless of the volume of traffic being fed through it."
"Cisco Enterprise Routers is reliable and secure."
"The product can scale."
"The most valuable feature is reliability."
"Juniper Enterprise Routers has a CLR and it's more reliable and faster than others."
"We are able to easily build chassis with Juniper MX Series Routers."
"The most valuable feature is the standard routing protocol."
"It's one of the more stable routers."
"It offers high protection and I like it."
"For the Juniper MX Series Routers, it plays a crucial role in our network. They offer numerous features, enabling multiple connections and handling various reports. The routers efficiently manage the number of switched fabric codes and process features based on the specific switch requirements. Previously, I utilized them for processing and addressing customer-side concerns. The routers have excellent documentation, making it easy to resolve any issues that may arise. It's excellent for customization, especially in tailoring the Windows configuration environment. Overall, dealing with this solution has been straightforward and efficient."
"The solution is stable."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"The solution's cloud management capabilities could be better."
"The configuration needs improvement. Most routers, like HP or Aruba, use a UI interface. Those solutions are similar and uniform. It's easier for us compared to Cisco because with Cisco you are not using normal commands. They need to enhance the UI to make it more usable."
"Performance is one area that could be improved. The stability of the devices is great, but performance-wise we find that upgrading the memory or changing the device entirely is sometimes necessary."
"If they can negate or reduce the modem delay, that would be great."
"We would like to see the security improved."
"Cisco routers are an expensive product."
"While scalability is available, it must be paid for."
"If I only have one LAN port in which I want to connect more than one device, I have to buy an add-on card so that I can have two LAN ports. The smaller devices and low-end routers have about four LAN ports. This solution is a high-end device but has only one. It would be preferable if they offered more LAN ports."
"If you are setting up a site-to-site VPN between a Juniper and Cisco device then you may encounter some issues."
"Currently, I don't have specific concerns or ideas for improvement. Regarding functionalities, I appreciate the user interface of Juniper Elite. Additionally, I'm exploring the use of Juniper Routers in a Parliament environment, particularly with Baragon, and so far, I find it to be a valuable feature. We're currently facing an issue as we're in the process of building and dealing with the software, specifically transitioning from R2 to RC. It's like when there is an update in the routers, and in the process, there are chances to end up losing some of your settings. The challenge arises because the recommended configurations for RC do not align with our features, necessitating a reevaluation of many features. It would have been more efficient if the initial recommendation had been for RC, avoiding the need to redo our research. This has resulted in a loss of time for us, and we've encountered this situation multiple times."
"The solution could improve reliability and it needs more functions."
"Juniper Enterprise Routers could improve by adding a graphical user interface(GUI). They do not have one. Most of our team has to have a background or expertise in Juniper. When compared to other solutions, they have a GUI. It will be easier for new team members to get familiar with, configure, or set up the router. Additionally, adding some monitoring tools would help us."
"The solution could improve by providing better training to allow more sales of the solution in the market."
"There is room for improvement in pricing. The product could be cheaper for smaller networks."
"Juniper must publish more information about Juniper MX Series Routers."
"The solution needs to offer SDN features."
Cisco Enterprise Routers is ranked 2nd in Routers with 101 reviews while Juniper MX Series Routers is ranked 3rd in Routers with 33 reviews. Cisco Enterprise Routers is rated 8.6, while Juniper MX Series Routers is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Enterprise Routers writes "Allows us to configure NAS through Cisco activities and to create GRE channels with different sites". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper MX Series Routers writes "Good performance, long life span, and easy to set up". Cisco Enterprise Routers is most compared with MikroTik Routers and Switches, Huawei Enterprise Routers, HPE Enterprise Routers, OneAccess Enterprise Routers and MikroTik Cloud Router Switch, whereas Juniper MX Series Routers is most compared with MikroTik Routers and Switches, Huawei Enterprise Routers, MikroTik Cloud Router Switch and HPE Enterprise Routers. See our Cisco Enterprise Routers vs. Juniper MX Series Routers report.
See our list of best Routers vendors.
We monitor all Routers 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.