Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN vs Steelhead comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN
Ranking in WAN Edge
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
90
Ranking in other categories
Network Management Applications (4th), Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (2nd)
Steelhead
Ranking in WAN Edge
14th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
WAN Optimization (3rd)
 

Featured Reviews

SN
Mar 13, 2024
A SD-WAN solution to interconnect the branch network
We need to renew the licensing after three years whenever updates are required. These licenses are valid for three years. There's no longer a need for routine physical maintenance of the devices, which is typical for network devices. We initially faced some challenges with sizing and acquiring the necessary devices. We encountered some issues with missing hub routers. However, once we overcame those obstacles, we involved Cisco professional services. They assisted us in creating the low-level design and supported the initial site deployments. After that, we were able to proceed independently. Our corporate professional services team guided us through the process and helped us develop the design. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
Chaudhary Muhammad Moez Manzar - PeerSpot reviewer
Nov 17, 2023
Exceptionally stable and reliable but costly
I have had hands-on experience with the initial setup of Steelhead, particularly in deploying it for a banking system in Pakistan. The deployment involved two cities, Karachi and Larkana, with around sixteen to eighteen branches. To start, we needed licenses for both Steelhead devices, crucial for optimizing traffic. Understanding the volume of traffic between the nodes is essential. For instance, if there is a 1 GB traffic requirement, we need to select a license capable of optimizing that volume. While the claim is that Steelhead can optimize up to 90%, we typically set realistic expectations, aiming for 60-70% optimization. Choosing the right device, analyzing its processing capabilities, ensuring hardware compatibility with the selected license, and understanding the specific requirements are key aspects of the setup process. The initial installation of Steelhead is more about careful planning than complex configuration. The trickiest part is deciding on the right device, box, and license. Figuring out which box suits the purpose and which license can handle the expected traffic volume is crucial. Once that is sorted, the configuration itself is relatively straightforward, mostly done through a user-friendly GUI. The key for engineers is understanding how to analyze the graphs and reports. During deployment, the focus shifts to selecting the appropriate box, software version, and license. The reports become essential for ongoing optimization. The full installation of Steelhead typically takes around one day. However, I usually monitor the system for about a week after deployment to gather mature data and generate comprehensive reports. The deployment of Steelhead is a team effort, not a solo task. Typically, it involves a presales person and a technician, especially if we are setting up in a data center. The infrastructure management and operations team, including system, network, and software teams, are also part of the process. In total, around nine to ten people might be involved, depending on the specific needs.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"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."
"It is a very scalable solution."
"This solution comes with comprehensive technical support."
"Any technical support we needed was great."
"There is minimum blind space in this solution."
"The most valuable feature is the application-level routing."
"SD-WAN provides a range of common benefits, including cost reduction, increased visibility, and scalability"
"The solution is great at aggregating the traffic and then sending it in one direction."
"Scalable data referencing is a great feature."
"The compression of Riverbed is very powerful. It can also handle large quantities of traffic."
"SteelHead works from the application. I use it to optimize traffic from Amazon. It is mainly used for customers who need to increase the traffic to 33K. For other users, it has been more of an operation."
"I find the most valuable to be the compression and exchange replication."
"TCP optimization... caches a particular TCP connection and the next time a user uses that connection he will reach the destination easily."
"It is very easy to install the solution."
"One of our most valuable features is Steelhead's cloud migration optimization. Moving to the cloud helped optimize our workflow, improving performance for end-users."
"Steelhead is stable, and it can even help you avoid service interruption in the event of a power outage. If your hardware fails, technical support will replace your device quickly."
 

Cons

"The solution could have a better web interface to simplify changing configurations."
"Cisco's router and voice gateway has not been available since the launch of SD-WAN."
"Since most user-data is going through the solution, we are concerned about security, as all the information is in the cloud and not on-premises. The user data authentification should be higher to better prevent malicious attacks."
"Simplifying the definition and implementation could add significant value, as it can be complex due to multiple product integrations and customization requirements."
"In the next release, Cisco should focus on simplifying the configuration of SD-WAN. SD-WAN has a lot of room to grow."
"The whole solution needs to be re-imagined. It's quite complex right now and really needs to be simplified to make it easier for those of us using it. It should offer more simplified management as well."
"The main issue is that not in the technology, but it comes back comparison. When we do a comparison with other SD WAN solutions, they are priced better."
"One of the major areas that Cisco can improve on with their SD-WAN offering is their security features. When compared with Fortinet, who have what they call their 'security pillars' (e.g. firewall and security features built-in to their SD-WAN solutions), Cisco generally comes up short. With Cisco, if you need a security component, you have to pay more to get it done. So if they could add more security features that come part and parcel with their existing solutions, then I think Cisco could be very aggressive in the market."
"Application response time and network performance could be improved."
"The product needs improvement in its integration with SDN."
"The product should offer more integration capabilities."
"Steelhead's handling of encrypted traffic could be improved because it requires some complex configuration to optimize encrypted traffic, especially when working with Microsoft protocols for mail servers and VPN services"
"If we load a primary firewall, the secondary firewall usually handles all the active connections, but in Riverbed, this isn't the case. We lose all the active connections at the moment of failure."
"The solution needs to have alert notifications."
"The application response time of the solution can be improved."
"They should include a network switch in a future release."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's costly. The cost is high compared to competitors."
"It is going to be on a yearly basis. There are no additional costs."
"The cost of Cisco SD-WAN is high and has room for improvement compared to competitors such as Fortinet which has similar functionality."
"Cloud subscription management must be paid for, although this does not incur a perpetual fee."
"On a scale of one to five, I would rate Cisco's pricing as a three."
"Cost-wise, Cisco SD-WAN is comparatively high."
"The price is high."
"The price of Cisco SD-WAN could improve, it is expensive. The cost of the solution is approximately 30 percent higher than competitors."
"The solution is expensive and the service contacts are costly too. The cost of the device makes the value proposition borderline acceptable for us. The service contract fees we pay is approximately $30,000 annually."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which WAN Edge solutions are best for your needs.
801,634 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
40%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Computer Software Company
21%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco SD-WAN?
When considering the most valuable features of Cisco SD-WAN, the decoupling of self-monitoring stands out significantly.
What needs improvement with Cisco SD-WAN?
Customers collaborate with ISPs and currently work with three ISPs, using options like LSM VPN and MPLS VPN to reduce line costs. They are considering moving from their current setup to an MPLS VPN...
What is the best network monitoring software for large enterprises?
We just did an assessment for our 47 datacenters around North America. The top two enterprise-level network monitoring solutions were ExtraHop first, Riverbed SteelCenter second. Their negotiated c...
What do you like most about Riverbed Steelhead?
One of our most valuable features is Steelhead's cloud migration optimization. Moving to the cloud helped optimize our workflow, improving performance for end-users.
What is your primary use case for Riverbed Steelhead?
The tool is useful as an optimization tool, especially in scenarios with limited bandwidth, like intra-connecting sites. It optimizes WAN traffic so that critical traffic gets priority and is optim...
 

Also Known As

Cisco SD-WAN
RIverbed Steelhead
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Doyle Research, Ashton Metzler & Associates
ElAraby, SFK Leblanc, Bobst Group, Northwest Pipe Company, Halkbank, Tradebridge, EFG Hermes
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN vs. Steelhead and other solutions. Updated: August 2024.
801,634 professionals have used our research since 2012.