Meraki SD-WAN vs Tungsten Fabric comparison

Cisco and LF Networking are both solutions in the Software Defined Networking (SDN) category. Cisco is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.7, while LF Networking is ranked #10. Cisco holds a 24.4% mindshare in SDN, compared to LF Networking’s 2.3% mindshare. Additionally, 97% of Cisco users are willing to recommend the solution.

Meraki SD-WAN

Read 77 Meraki SD-WAN reviews

1,721 Views
1,120 Comparison Views

97% willing to recommend

Tungsten Fabric

276 Views
184 Comparison Views

Meraki SD-WAN

Tungsten Fabric

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Meraki SD-WAN and Tungsten Fabric based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Aviatrix, TP-Link and others in Software Defined Networking (SDN).

To learn more, read our detailed Software Defined Networking (SDN) Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Software Defined Networking (SDN)

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 831,265 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Meraki SD-WAN

Ranking in Software Defined Networking (SDN)

1st

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Tungsten Fabric

Ranking in Software Defined Networking (SDN)

10th

Average Rating

0.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Software Defined Networking (SDN) category, the mindshare of Meraki SD-WAN is 24.4%, up from 23.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tungsten Fabric is 2.3%, down from 4.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Software Defined Networking (SDN)

Featured Reviews

Martyn Walker

Business development manager at Virgin Media

Enables productivity in terms of users and has ease of management

Scalability could be improved. Yes, you can add more than 300 or 400 sites onto it, but because it's not a true SD-WAN and, effectively, it's just a Multi-VRF, it's all hub and spoke at that point. That's the nature of the design, but that's what keeps it simple to administer. So, it's a trade off.

Read full review

Use Tungsten Fabric?

Share your opinion

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined Networking (SDN) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Energy/Utilities Company

Computer Software Company

22%

Educational Organization

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Meraki SD-WAN?

The auto VPN feature is important because it automates many tasks, making things simpler and faster. It helps with setting up devices and changing configurations without manual effort.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Meraki SD-WAN?

The price is a little bit higher than local vendors, for example, Huawei ZTE or H3C. However, some customers require the best quality and performance, thus needing solutions and products from Cisco.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Meraki SD-WAN?

They have to ask us many questions about configurations. It could be improved with some automation to trigger, for example, telemetry data, so we can determine the state of the deployment as of day...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN vs Meraki SD-WAN

Compared 25% of the time

Omada Cloud SDN vs Meraki SD-WAN

Compared 18% of the time

VMware VeloCloud SD-WAN vs Meraki SD-WAN

Compared 17% of the time

Prisma SD-WAN vs Meraki SD-WAN

Compared 12% of the time

Cradlepoint NetCloud vs Meraki SD-WAN

Compared 11% of the time

More Meraki SD-WAN Competitors

VMware NSX vs Tungsten Fabric

Compared 57% of the time

Juniper Contrail Networking vs Tungsten Fabric

Compared 43% of the time

More Tungsten Fabric Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Meraki SD-WAN

January 2025

Download Meraki SD-WAN product report

Buyer's Guide

Software Defined Networking (SDN)

January 2025

Download Tungsten Fabric product report

Also Known As

No data available

OpenContrail

Learn More

Video not available

Cisco

Video not available

LF Networking

Overview

Software-defined WAN is a new approach to network connectivity that lowers operational costs and improves resource usage for multi-site deployments, allowing network administrators to use bandwidth more efficiently and ensure the highest possible level of performance for critical applications without sacrificing security or data privacy. For more information on deploying and configuring SD-WAN on the Meraki MX Security Appliance, see the Meraki SD-WAN Deployment Guide.

Tungsten Fabric is an open source network virtualization solution for providing connectivity and security for virtual, containerized or bare-metal workloads.

Sample Customers

École Jeannine Manuel

Juniper Networks

Buyer's Guide

Software Defined Networking (SDN)

January 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Aviatrix, TP-Link and others in Software Defined Networking (SDN). Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Software Defined Networking (SDN) vendors.

We monitor all Software Defined Networking (SDN) 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.