We compared VMware NSX and Cisco Secure Workload based on our users' reviews in six categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: VMware NSX provides advanced virtual networking capabilities, a distributed firewall, and seamless integration with VMware Hypervisor. Nevertheless, it has areas that could be enhanced such as licensing clarity, compatibility with non-Windows operating systems, and user-friendliness. Conversely, Cisco Secure Workload is commended for its user-friendly interface, stability, and comprehensive solution. However, it faces challenges in terms of integration, a complex dashboard, and controversy surrounding data reduction. Cisco Secure Workload does excel in providing excellent technical support, particularly for networking products.
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that we don't have to do packet captures on the network."
"The product provides multiple-device integration."
"The product offers great visibility into the network so we can enforce security measures."
"Scalability is its most valuable feature."
"A complete and powerful micro-segmentation solution."
"By using Tetration insight, we are able to get the latency on our level accounts and we can determine whatever the issue is with the application latency itself."
"Secure Workload's best feature is that it's an end-to-end offering from Cisco."
"Instead of proving that all the access control lists are in place and all the EPGs are correct, we can just point the auditor to a dashboard and point out that there aren't any escaped conversations. It saves an enormous, enormous amount of time."
"The most valuable feature of VMware NSX is the ease of use and its user friendly. For example, it is simple to change the subnet masks."
"The solution is very good at micro-segmentation."
"I have found the system to be very intuitive, functional, and they have great technology."
"We secured our organisation with Micro-segmentation."
"This is the most scalable product of its type."
"The solution is very stable and reliable."
"Over the last two years, they've enhanced a lot, especially in regard to integration with OpenStack."
"We are happy with the scalability."
"They should scale down the hardware a bit. The initial hardware investment is two million dollars so it's a price point problem. The issue with the price comes from the fact that you have to have it with enormous storage and enormous computes."
"The emailed notifications are either hard to find or they are not available. Search capabilities can be improved."
"There was a controversy when Cisco reduced the amount of data they kept, and the solution became quite cost-intensive, which made its adoption challenging….Although they have modified it now, I preferred the previous version, and I wish all the functionality were back under the same product."
"There is some overlap between Cisco Tetration and AppDynamics and I need to have a single pane of glass, rather than have to jump between different tools."
"The interface is really helpful for technical people, but it is not user-friendly."
"The multi-tenancy, redundancy, backup and restore functionalities, as well as the monitoring aspects of the solution, need improvement. The solution offers virtually no enterprise-grade possibility for monitoring."
"Secure Workload is a little complicated to use, and the dashboard isn't intuitive, so it takes a while to learn how to use it."
"The integration could be better, especially with different types of solutions."
"It needs to be cheaper."
"They have some limitations in the firewall features as compared to the on-prem or dedicated hardware appliance. They can add more features, such as IPS and IDS, to the cloud firewall."
"Their licensing model should make it easier to purchase licenses."
"VMware NSX only supports some platforms like KVM."
"One aspect that needs improvement is the need for further automation."
"It still needs to grow. There are still some features that it doesn't do, like it doesn't do multicasting."
"I would like to have automating reporting built into common service management platforms, such as JIRA, Serviceaide, and ServiceNow."
"The feature it can improve is essentially application-based load balancing with intelligent load distribution for applications that require redundancy and high availability."
Cisco Secure Workload is ranked 9th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 13 reviews while VMware NSX is ranked 1st in Cloud and Data Center Security with 94 reviews. Cisco Secure Workload is rated 8.4, while VMware NSX is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Workload writes "A solution that provides good technical support but its high cost makes it challenging for users to adopt it". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware NSX writes "Allows for seamless micro-segmentation and the support is exceptional". Cisco Secure Workload is most compared with Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Illumio, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Cisco ACI and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), whereas VMware NSX is most compared with Nutanix Flow Network Security, Illumio, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco ACI and Check Point CloudGuard Network Security. See our Cisco Secure Workload vs. VMware NSX report.
See our list of best Cloud and Data Center Security vendors and best Microsegmentation Software vendors.
We monitor all Cloud and Data Center Security 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.