Cisco Nexus Reviews

The Cisco Nexus switches are the best and most reliable solution for us in my previous company, which was a telecom service provider. We used cisco modular switches for our heavy services as part of our GSM network as it requires heavy processing and highest performance.

Its easy management is most valuable. It is easy to use, easy to manage, stable, and very reliable.

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.

I have been using this solution for quite sometime, several years.

It is stable and reliable.

It is very scalable. We had around 7,000 users in our company & more than 26 million GSM customers.

They have been responsive, but you need the right support contract. We had critical operations, and normally, we asked for the highest level of support and next-day replacement or avail spare parts on-site. It was easy and not that difficult but very costly. 

It was straightforward and easy.

General it is a mutual cooperation and ix between the in-house team and the vendor, and both are highly qualified.

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 need to be improved.

I would rate Cisco Nexus an eight out of ten.

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 implementations from HP, but I think it's limited there.

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. We have had a problem in an order of a batch of optics, which is practically failing. So that was about the average of optics, which caused us quite some problem.

We have been using Cisco Nexus Switches since 2017 or about four years.

This year, we have only experienced the problem once. Of course, it was not identified and I had a problem with OTB wiring and we experienced it just once. I stayed in kind of generic configuration, that's why we're like Cisco, because they are significantly stable.  If you don't try to do something fancy and they don't get problems.

We have also the advance services of Cisco to support us there. I think they are still better than some competition. But, I think, their quality has decreased. In the past week they were not very good. They have had better quality.

We work with our account manager to negotiate a good price, so overall, I think the pricing is fair.

I would recommend Cisco Nexus Switches. Of course, there is the ACI deployment and the challenges there. It is always a challenge to keep up with the technology. They are just constantly doing some updates and changes and becoming the modern marketer is challenging. So in the past fiscal year for data center and every JSS deployment things are much more complicated. I would give it an eight on a scale of ten, because of the problem which we had. I'm just thinking in respect of competition.

We use this solution for the access layer of our network.

This solution is helping us in terms of providing SDN, software-defined networking.

The most valuable features are the access layer security, OpenConfig, and OpenFlow.

We would like to see OpenConfig covering most of the industry standards. The YANG models, for example, and also support for OpenFlow.

The areas that need improvement are MACsec, OpenConfig, and OpenFlow.

Stability is not really up to the mark. There are a lot of bugs in MACsec and OpenFlow.

Scalability is good enough for now, and not really an issue for us.

I have not spoken with technical support.

We did use another solution prior to this one. We have had a lot of different switches.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward. For the configuration, we used zero-touch provisioning, so it was straightforward.

We had assistance with the deployment of the solution.

We are multi-vendor, so whoever gives us the best product is the one we purchase from.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to start their testing early, as the features need time to run.

This solution needs a lot more improvement, such as the bugs that need to be fixed.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We use Cisco Nexus for data center requirements and interconnectivity. 

VPC is the most valuable feature for us. 

Cisco Nexus is very safe and stable. I've been here 8 months. We have some devices that have been out for 11 years.

It's scalable.

Cisco customer support is very easy and very quick. If I need to I can get somebody on the phone straight away.

I've used Ruckus, HP, Dell, and smaller products for enterprise solutions.

The hardest part with Cisco Nexus is learning new features. What would be nice is if Nexus were easier to use. Best practices in deployment would be helpful.

Cisco Nexus is just a platform. You just set it up, give it an IP, and then start configuring it. But there are a million features to configure.

I'm always thinking of the environment a little bit as I learn new things. After the initial sale, deployment I can do in an hour. Once you start trying to fork out the little kinks, it is longer.

Pay attention to what shows up in your excess logs. We try to stay current with updates. Try to keep up with that.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would rate Nexus a 10 for stability. There's always room for improvement.

Cisco Nexus introduced VDC, Virtual Device Context, meaning the person has a single physical box, usually one pair, for dynamic purposes. This pair allows one to create multiple logical switches, for totally different functioning. One could be for production, another for UAT, a third for Dev. Yet, we are talking about a physically single box. It has also introduced VPC, Virtual Port Channel, which allows for more redundancy and flexibility.

Cisco Nexus if focused primarily on the data center. While it has been in the market for nearly ten years, there are still many areas in need of improvement. There may be many bugs which remain unresolved. It is important for Cisco to be aware of the various issues it encounters and come up with new releases. 

The frequency with which this occurs can vary. It may take months, be done quarterly or, sometimes, after half a year has elapsed. There is still much to be done to increase their stability, something which can depend. 

The solution is relatively expensive when compared with Cisco Catalyst.

We have been dealing with Cisco Nexus since it first emerged around ten years ago. 

While this can depend, there is still much to be done to improve the solution's stability. 

The solution is relatively expensive when compared with Cisco Catalyst.

Nexus, which uses NX-OS, runs on a different operating system than CatOS, which means that the latter tends to run on OS - just like a Cisco router - only with the functioning being a bit different. While NX-OS is very different, even when it comes to the command line, most things are the same.

However, NX-OS already introduced a different concept, which is more like a carrier level. They have a dedicated command management module. All other modules have comparatively many more functions or power than regular Catalyst switches.

Nexus' primary focus is on the data center and supports what are known as top-of-rack or end-of-rack features, including the cost of cabling. So too, the latest one, the Nexus 9K, also supports a software-defined cloud with Cisco ACI, which is what this is referred to when typically deployed inside the company.

The solution is relatively expensive when compared with Cisco Catalyst.

We are talking about a network portion. Catalyst and Nexus switches are all part of the network domain.

I rate Cisco Nexus as an eight out of ten, as it is a new platform. 

Our primary use case for the Cisco Nexus solution is as a core fiber switch.

We upgraded from a 6509 unit to a 9504. We got increased bandwidth, faster performance, and newer software which has improved our organization. 

We use Cisco Nexus as a switch that houses all of our fiber connections.

They should make it easier to update the code on it. Upgrading should also be easier. 

The stability of the solution is very strong. No downtime with it. No problems. No issues.

It scales to just about any use that we needed to throw at it. It's very accommodating.

The solution's technical support is perfect. We have had no problems with it.

We switched because our current product was end-of-life and falling out of support.

The initial setup was straightforward. It has a simple routing protocol, not very many static routes.

We used a certified reseller for deployment. Our experience with them was excellent.

We have seen ROI. 

We didn't have any other vendors in mind. Cisco is the product that we've used quite heavily, so it made sense to stay with them.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this product a ten. Cisco Nexus is very solid and easy to use. 

Go with Nexus, you won't regret it.

The primary use case is for a secure and reliable connection to our servers. We use Nexus to connect to servers with a large capacity and high throughput. The solution has high availability which is very important for us, and Nexus provides that.

Nexus provides the ability to visualize the servers and redundant components, like redundant supervisor modules and power supplies. The technologies like VPC (Virtual Port-Channel) really helps us to provide high availability, high throughput, and continuity to our services. That is what we want to achieve to keep our customers happy.

By improving the stability and availability it improves the way the company functions. That is what we were looking for. For very powerful equipment with a lot of throughputs and a lot of features to provide high availability.

For the Nexus solution features that we use most are the VDCs (Virtual Device Contexts) which are the virtual domain, and VPC for trunking and aggregation.

There is not much that needs to be improved at this stage. If it were possible to gain even more throughput and more port diversity, that can always be a benefit.

This solution has very good stability. The Nexus platform was selected because it is very stable with a lot of features. We are very happy with the products and the choice.

This solution scales a lot, easily. The 7000s have a huge capacity. The scalability will depend on the model you have, but the 7000s we have are very versatile. We have a lot of ports installed already and we can still add more.

I don't know if we used tech support. It could be that everything went so well that we didn't have to. But I don't know.

Previously, we had other switches (I don't know exactly which vendors as that was before I was with the company) and those were very a big investment. These new ones are not cheap, but provide more value for the money.

We had to go through different steps and that made the setup a little more complicated than it would have been if we could have deployed in one shot. We had to deploy in a few steps so it took more effort. It doesn't detract from the value of the end product.

We used partners to do the implementation. It was a very good experience. Their technical knowledge of the product was good and they integrated the box quickly. It was fast and good and would have probably taken us a lot more time had we done it on our own.

It is a bit expensive to get started. The solution is more expensive than most of the competitors for sure. But in the end, it is stable and provides a service and that meets our performance goals. So the ROI is very good.

When I came to the company they had already made their evaluations and the conversion project was already underway. I know they selected this because they felt it was the most stable solution. The route of Nexus had a lot of throughputs but it is also very reliable. We were looking for reliable, scalable technology. The point of making a change was to avoid failures and that is why we chose Nexus.

I rate the solution as a nine out of ten. The 7000 series switches, especially, I would put at nine out of ten. It is only not a ten because there is always room for improvement.

The Nexus platform is very stable. It has a lot of features and does not fail. So if you are looking for performance, stability, and reliability, the Nexus product seems to me to be the best solution.

We use this solution mainly for the data center and or a yacht. They were used as core switches on a three-layer network.

They were the core level for a 90-meter yacht. They were connected with a fiber single-mode backbone.

When it comes to data centers, Cisco Nexus is the best.

The flexibility and configuration could be better. It needs to be improved.

It is not as reliable as Catalyst.

I have been working with Cisco Nexus for 15 years.

My experience with the stability of Nexus was that there was a failure with the power supply. I had to replace the hardware component related to the power supply.

I have had fewer issues with stability when using Catalyst.

Cisco support is always the same. It doesn't matter if you are looking for support for Wi-Fi, or any other product they offer, they will figure out the solution. 

The support is always the same, they are fast and professional, even if you don't have a valid service contract.

Using Nexus was a request from the customer and we installed it based on their request.

We would have preferred to install Catalyst. They are more flexible and the configuration of the high availability features are better than Nexus.

Nexus is the best solution for the data center and not as a solution for a moving environment, such as a yacht, that would have issues related to the power supply. This is why Catalyst would have been better than Nexus.

With my experience with Catalyst, I would rate it a nine out of ten.

The installation was not as easy as it was with Catalyst. The configuration was more difficult.

They have a similar CLI, but different components and features.

We need a team of four to maintain this solution. The team consists of one manager, two technicians, and one installer.

We purchased this solution as per the client's request. We completed the installation with their requested license and features.

We did not evaluate other solutions for our client.  

We didn't spend time researching the best solution for the client. They had a particular method and requested Cisco Nexus specifically.

My recommendation would be with Cisco Catalyst. I prefer Catalyst over Nexus because of its flexibility and reliability.

I only used Nexus one time and don't have a good comparison. I would rate it a seven out of ten.