We performed a comparison between Cisco SD-WAN and FatPipe SD-WAN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Fortinet, Check Point Software Technologies and others in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions."The solution is stable and reliable."
"I have found the solution's main features are its ability to be customized, network traffic classification, and has a wide range of features that can be set."
"The most valuable features, application awareness, and failover resilience, stand out as key considerations for users."
"Cisco SD-WAN's collaborative features are unique and sustainable. I also like the protocols, which use two SD-WAN."
"The most useful feature is centralized telephony."
"The reliability is high and we have only had to restart it once or twice over the years."
"SD-WAN is very stable - once it's deployed, you can just forget about it, it runs by itself."
"With other routing protocols, we have had to send team members to perform installations and configurations. There is a lot of work involved. However with SD-WAN, once it is installed it is fully automated, and we can do all other tasks remotely. We don't have to send staff out to the client's location. It's very independent, and we can establish SD-WAN connectivity easily. It is secure as well."
"The most valuable feature of FatPipe SD-WAN is it's based on SD-WAN technology."
"Cisco SD-WAN's clustering mechanism needs to be improved. If there are more than five milliseconds of latency time between installations of the VM manager, the cluster automatically breaks down."
"The cost is too high for certain countries, for example, those in Africa. The solution needs to be more cost-effective."
"There should be more security features in the hybrid and on-premise deployments of Cisco SD-WAN. The cloud has most of the security features."
"We don't have any issues with this solution other than the price."
"The solution could be more secure. Security is always a priority for us."
"The solution needs to be more flexible around legacy devices."
"The Cisco way of thinking is to create umbrella-like solutions. I would prefer it if this solution was separate from the entire monstrous Cisco portfolio."
"Customers require features that are secure for endpoints, on-premises, and for the cloud."
"FatPipe SD-WAN can improve the price to scale the solution."
Cisco SD-WAN is ranked 1st in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 86 reviews while FatPipe SD-WAN is ranked 16th in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 1 review. Cisco SD-WAN is rated 8.0, while FatPipe SD-WAN is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco SD-WAN writes "A solution for integrating services to enhance up-time, performance and lower costs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of FatPipe SD-WAN writes "Beneficial technology, reliable, and simple deployment". Cisco SD-WAN is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki SD-WAN, VMware SD-WAN, Juniper Session Smart Router and Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform, whereas FatPipe SD-WAN is most compared with VMware SD-WAN and Fortinet FortiGate.
See our list of best Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions vendors and best WAN Edge vendors.
We monitor all Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions 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.