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

Cisco Wireless vs Ubiquiti Wireless comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
1.0
Cisco Wireless delivers fast ROI with improved productivity, security, and connectivity, valued by both profit and non-profit organizations.
Sentiment score
6.3
Ubiquiti Wireless users report long-lasting equipment with minimal maintenance, though some suggest improvements and additional user controls.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
4.8
Cisco Wireless customer service is highly rated for prompt, knowledgeable support, despite some regional variability in quality.
Sentiment score
5.2
Ubiquiti Wireless support varies, relying on email and forums; lacks phone support, leading to mixed user experiences.
The technical support from Cisco is of high quality.
The technical support from Cisco is good.
The main concern is about response time rather than technical expertise or experience.
I didn't have any issues with Ubiquiti support.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
5.9
Cisco Wireless offers efficient scalability for various business sizes, though costs and controller limits may pose challenges.
Sentiment score
7.5
Ubiquiti Wireless excels in scalability and centralized management, ideal for small to medium businesses expanding their network infrastructure.
We primarily use them for switching and Wi-Fi solutions.
Ubiquiti Wireless offers large scalability, which is very important for our company as we have multiple sites that need to be interconnected and managed effectively.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
Cisco Wireless is highly stable and reliable, performing well across environments with minimal issues and high user satisfaction.
Sentiment score
7.3
Ubiquiti Wireless is praised for its stable, reliable performance, with occasional connectivity issues noted in crowded areas.
Ubiquiti Wireless is rated ten out of ten for stability.
 

Room For Improvement

Cisco Wireless faces cost, configuration, usability, security, cloud integration, and compatibility issues, requiring improvements across features, UI, and support.
Ubiquiti Wireless lacks advanced features, scalability, and support, facing issues with usability, integration, durability, and supply chain.
Sometimes, integration with other Cisco products requires manual intervention for tasks such as firmware upgrades, which should be automated.
In the long term, there could be a cost reduction because it does not require much maintenance.
Enterprise users require more details and options.
The user interface could be made more intuitive.
When implementing Wi-Fi for a campus, we use Cisco for the core backbone infrastructure, while implementing Ubiquiti Wireless for the Wi-Fi and controller.
 

Setup Cost

Cisco Wireless offers premium, high-quality solutions with complex licensing, perceived as costly but justified by reliability, security, and performance.
Ubiquiti Wireless is praised for its affordability and no licensing fees, making it ideal for small to medium businesses.
Cisco has provided significant discounts for large-scale deployments.
The price of Cisco Wireless is pretty expensive.
The licensing of Cisco Wireless is competitive.
Ubiquiti Wireless is cheaper.
The equipment is priced relatively high, though the value it provides makes it worth the cost.
Ubiquiti Wireless is quite affordable, making it accessible for smaller companies.
 

Valuable Features

Cisco Wireless excels in security, scalability, integration, ease of installation, and management, offering reliable connectivity and advanced features.
Ubiquiti Wireless excels in setup, management, performance, and security, offering scalable, affordable solutions with robust coverage and intuitive use.
If one network fails, there is a link between different access points, which ensures network continuity.
Cisco Wireless is easy to configure.
When I install it, I can forget about it because there is no need for ongoing maintenance, and no other problems occur.
Since implementing Ubiquiti Wireless, I have seen improvements in connection security, wireless speed, and overall network stability.
The integration of Ubiquiti Wireless with other Ubiquiti products in the setup is seamless and perfect.
They integrate into the management console very easily, making diagnostics and configuration changes simple.
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Wireless
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.1
Number of Reviews
153
Ranking in other categories
Wireless LAN (3rd)
Ubiquiti Wireless
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
77
Ranking in other categories
Wireless WAN (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Enterprise Networking solutions, they serve different purposes. Cisco Wireless is designed for Wireless LAN and holds a mindshare of 11.0%, down 13.6% compared to last year.
Ubiquiti Wireless, on the other hand, focuses on Wireless WAN, holds 38.3% mindshare, down 39.9% since last year.
Wireless LAN Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cisco Wireless11.0%
Aruba Wireless15.7%
Ruckus Wireless14.0%
Other59.3%
Wireless LAN
Wireless WAN Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Ubiquiti Wireless38.3%
Ruckus Wireless WAN33.0%
Cambium Networks Wireless WAN12.3%
Other16.400000000000006%
Wireless WAN
 

Featured Reviews

Theesula Majuwanagamage - PeerSpot reviewer
Bridging capabilities ensure network continuity and reliability in large-scale deployments
The most valuable feature of Cisco Wireless is the bridging capability. If one network fails, there is a link between different access points, which ensures network continuity. Additionally, Cisco offers significant discounts for large projects. The reliability and robust solution are also key aspects, as there have been no errors or failures. The implementation is straightforward, and the user interface connection is easy.
Donald Ochanda - PeerSpot reviewer
Seamless coverage amplifies connectivity while enhanced responsiveness strengthens potential
We do not prefer Ubiquiti Wireless switches for more complex environments, not because they lack scalability, but because we haven't explored their products extensively. We are strong on their Wi-Fi solution. When implementing Wi-Fi for a campus, we use Cisco for the core backbone infrastructure, while implementing Ubiquiti Wireless for the Wi-Fi and controller. Perhaps we haven't discovered switches that would match our requirements, or maybe they exist but we haven't explored their capabilities fully. Regarding improvements to Ubiquiti Wireless, I cannot provide specific suggestions as I'm not an expert on Wi-Fi, as there is a dedicated team that handles Wi-Fi solutions.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Wireless LAN solutions are best for your needs.
867,783 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user212721 - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 24, 2015
Cisco vs. Aruba Wireless Solutions
Cisco or Aruba Networks? If you are considering wireless access solutions, this is a common question that you are probably asking. You probably have sales people knocking at your door. How do you make sense of all the stories that you are presented with. If you have done any research, you are…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Government
6%
Educational Organization
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business73
Midsize Enterprise42
Large Enterprise74
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business48
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise18
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Cisco Wireless or Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN?
Cisco Wireless is very robust, very rugged, and can handle indoor and outdoor coverage extremely well. We found it to be very reliable and to consistently run very efficiently. Cisco Wireless helpe...
Which is better - Ruckus Wireless or Cisco Wireless?
Ruckus Wireless offers users the benefit of being both easy to set up and get running as well as being very user friendly. This user-friendly quality also renders it easy to learn how to use and ma...
How does Cisco Wireless compare with Aruba Wireless?
On the most basic level, Cisco Wireless can offer a rather straightforward initial setup. In the span of about three hours, the basic framework can be set up. Step-by-step instructions are availabl...
Is Ubiquiti Wireless better than Ruckus Wireless WAN?
Ubiquiti Wireless is extremely easy to set up and is an excellent option for small businesses, offering enterprise features for a one-time fee and no ongoing licensing fees. Ubiquiti Wireless is ve...
Which is better - Cambium or Ubiquiti Wireless?
For me, Ubiquiti was easy to install, configure, set up, and maintain, while also providing solid coverage and better handoffs between APs. This is especially relevant if you are using Apple produc...
Which is better - Ubiquiti Wireless or Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN?
Ubiquiti Wireless offers a wide range of WLAN products. We tested their devices before ultimately choosing Cisco Meraki. Ubiquiti devices have good outdoor performance and the connection is very st...
 

Also Known As

Cisco WLAN Controller
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aegean Motorway, Baylor Scott & White Health, Beachbody, Bellevue, Brunel University London, Bucks County Intermediate Unit , Chartwell School, Children's Hospital Colorado, Cisco Live Milan, City of Biel, City of Mississauga, Dundee Precious Metals, Electricity Authority of Cyprus, Erickson Living, Goldcorp, Great Ormond Street Hospital, Grupo Industrial Saltillo (GIS)
NASCAR Grand-AM, Maritime Parc, Outdoor Music Festival, British Armed Forces, Arcadia School District, Moscow - Enforta
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Ruckus, Cisco and others in Wireless LAN. Updated: August 2025.
867,783 professionals have used our research since 2012.