We performed a comparison between Cisco Catalyst Switches and Juniper MX Series Universal Routing Platforms based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Center Networking solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is beneficial for interconnecting POE telephones, computers, printers, and buffering networks."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco equipment is reliability."
"The new series has lots of great features, it's really lovely. From a management perspective, or a policy creation perspective, which we are seeing in the Catalyst 9000 series it is great."
"It enables fast data transfer rates, while offering stable and consistent network performance."
"The PoE capability of Catalyst Switches is great for using WAPs and other PoE equipment, such as security cameras."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is reliability."
"There is a lot of improvement in the network segment after replacing the older switches. I have not seen any kind of issue with these switches since deployment. They are pretty much stable."
"The product is very robust."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper MX Series Universal Routing Platforms is its robustness."
"It's a stable product."
"The most valuable Juniper MX Series Universal Routing Platform is its ability to do routing in any way that I need. It's more than capable of handling the load I'm currently sending."
"This solution is easy to manage and the resiliency of the hardware is excellent."
"The product could be more user-friendly."
"The support is not the quickest."
"The GUI should be addressed."
"This product could be improved with cheaper pricing."
"All other modules have comparatively many more functions or power than regular Catalyst switches."
"The current catalyst is probably outdated so we will most likely move to the newer version of the solution soon."
"There are multiple operating systems across Cisco's portfolio, which is problematic."
"Cisco should focus more on this type of product instead of on data center switches. They stopped improving the software of these switches and they are focusing on the data center. They should focus on this type of product, more than any other thing."
"It needs to be more multifunctional for enterprises."
"Although the support for this solution is good, there is still room for improvement."
"Juniper MX Series Universal Routing Platforms should improve by being more agile with new technology that sits on top of the router."
"Juniper MX Series Universal Routing Platforms could improve by having a graphical interface. A lot of the younger generation tend to be used to graphical interfaces, command line tends to scare them."
More Juniper MX Series Universal Routing Platforms Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Catalyst Switches is ranked 1st in Data Center Networking with 171 reviews while Juniper MX Series Universal Routing Platforms is ranked 7th in Data Center Networking with 4 reviews. Cisco Catalyst Switches is rated 8.6, while Juniper MX Series Universal Routing Platforms is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Catalyst Switches writes "Reliable and stable catalyst switch; can be easily installed". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper MX Series Universal Routing Platforms writes "Highly stable environment, performs well, and reasonably priced". Cisco Catalyst Switches is most compared with Arista Networks Platform, Dell PowerConnect Switches, Cisco Nexus, HPE ProCurve and ExtremeSwitching, whereas Juniper MX Series Universal Routing Platforms is most compared with Juniper QFX Series Switches, PTX Series Routers and Cisco Nexus. See our Cisco Catalyst Switches vs. Juniper MX Series Universal Routing Platforms report.
See our list of best Data Center Networking vendors.
We monitor all Data Center Networking 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.
