Cisco Intersight Reviews

While it is a very complex solution. We have managed to deploy it for ten data centers across our environment.

It's doing pretty well. We're managing our EdgeX nodes and doing all the upgrades.

It has helped us in many ways. Since our team is only six members and we have ten data centers across the site, it's difficult for us to manage the patching for EdgeX plus the firmware upgrades. Both are very heavy and very critical. Using Intersight with this small team makes our job easy. That's the biggest benefit - the ease of management.

I have had a very good experience. 

It has many great features. 

We enjoy having an inside view of all the data centers and all the EdgeX nodes within a single portal rather than going into the EdgeX connections one by one.

The solution can scale. 

It's a very complex solution.

Sometimes it's lacking upgrades in the UCS, and I have to deal with the firmware from the UCS manager. 

We're now looking towards expansion and adding vCenters in Intersight. We are currently exploring the new features with our partner. Since we have the on-prem version, its features are fewer than the cloud. It would be nice to have more features for the on-prem option. 

There is room for enhancement in a feature called Robo. 

I've been using the solution for almost four years. 

The major challenge for us and for Cisco Intersight is the upgrade process. Sometimes when we ask for the upgrade, we had to have a discussion internally with the team and with our Cisco tech engineer regarding the latest version. The current version for us was 4.52B and we were exploring the idea of moving to 2C, and they recommended going first to 2E. When we asked why they told us that version was very stable and came highly recommended. 

I know there is a difference between the long-term upgrade and the feature upgrade. Sometimes you need the new batches to eliminate any vulnerabilities or fix any bugs.

It's easily scalable. 

Only the system administrators are using the solution. That's six people. 

I'm not sure if there are plans to increase usage right now. 

Regarding support, our tech engineer is always available 24/7. We had one major issue at the beginning of the new year last year. and the tech engineer was with us right away at the time. The issue started at 10:00 PM in Egyptian local time, which means GMT plus two. We were stuck on the issue for almost six or seven hours. He stuck with us and was very professional and handled the job very professionally.

Technical support is always there whenever we need them.

I have not used a different solution. 

I wasn't there attending to the implementation for Intersight. That said, I managed to deploy the EdgeX nodes and the clusters for the standard and the edge clusters for the standard edge. I have been there to witness how to deploy the extended nodes as well. It's very complex, and it requires lots of technical skills. That said, the process was very enjoyable for me, exploring new tech from Cisco.

You only need two people to deploy the solution - one member of the IT team and one administrator. Typically you want to ensure the person with the most experience is handling the implementation. 

While I'm sure there is an ROI based on the benefits I've seen, I don't have any hard statistics. 

The hyper-converged technology is one of the major technologies right now, especially in consolidating the network and the storage tiers. It relieves us from a lot of pain and a lot of workload regarding the storage tier and network tier, and also the environment for it.

I do not handle the licensing aspect of the solution. 

I have heard of Nutanix and VxRail as other options. We looked into these and after some long discussions chose to instead go with Cisco. We do use a lot of Cisco in our infrastructure. 

We're currently using the EdgeX nodes M5, and the next generation is M6. I really recommend using these servers. It's really solid and actually has very long-term stability.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Cisco Intersight has multiple use cases. It has developed into a bigger portfolio. Earlier, it was used mostly to manage the devices remotely. It was initially from Meraki, but then I saw it trickling down to switches. Now it is for HyperFlex, so now they're also developing: CBO, IWO, etc., are now being brought onto Cisco Intersight as part of its product portfolio. The product can be used for many things, mostly for management.

What I like best about Cisco Intersight is the way it's developing and converging into everything that the cloud has to offer, e.g. it's converging into one platform which is good. It's good for cloud integration, so it can be a Kubernetes cluster. It can be your on-premise cluster. It can be hybrid cloud. All of that can be managed through different suites within Cisco Intersight. It is a good product.

What could be improved in Cisco Intersight is hybrid cloud management, especially when compared to the likes of VMware Tanzu, though VMware Tanzu is quite mature, while Cisco Intersight is just new. Hybrid cloud management is a segment of the product that would need a lot of improvement.

An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of Cisco Intersight is for it to have a proper hyperscale tie-up, e.g. it can be Amazon, Azure, GCP, etc. It should also have SDN solutions, and the ACI solution should be as competitive as NSX. ACI is good, but it's mostly good as an underlay solution, so on the contrary, NSX does it on the overlay, and you can call them as a proper SDN solution. When it comes to microservices, NSX is the de facto.

Cisco Intersight is a stable product, but it needs some improvement. From one to five, I'm scoring it a three.

Cisco Intersight is a scalable product.

The initial setup for Cisco Intersight was quite easy. It was not that difficult. From one to five, one being difficult and five being easy, I'm rating it 3.5.

Cisco Intersight is not cheap, but it's not the most expensive product either. If I would rate the price from one to five, I'd rate it a three.

I evaluated VMware Tanzu.

We are partners with Cisco. We are solution integrators. We are not customers.

Cisco will be focusing more on Cisco Intersight, so that's where we are going. That's the solution we're using.

We do both on-premises and cloud deployment with Cisco Intersight. We can also do SaaS.

For one organization, two people is enough to maintain Cisco Intersight, particularly for a mid-size customer.

The number of Cisco staff here is large enough, but the technical staff, are not as many as you'd desire. They have a local presence, but not as big as Dell EMC. We are the biggest partner of Cisco here in our region.

Cisco Intersight has a lot of competitors, e.g. GCP, Azure, AWS, etc., but it's quite a new product on the rack, so it'll take some time for it to develop.

Cisco Intersight is a recommended product, but you should have a Cisco install base. It's not meant for a non-Cisco install base. It's a very good tool if you have a Cisco house, but if not, you won't see much from the product, because it's not a very heterogeneous solution. It's primarily for Cisco workloads. It's not mature enough, so I don't think there are a lot of options in Cisco Intersight for non-Cisco workloads.

I would rate Cisco Intersight eight out of ten.

I'm an IT enterprise system administrator.

Implementing this solution has helped us in many ways. We have 10 data centers across the site, so there's a lot to manage. The patching for the HX and the firmware upgrade is very heavy and critical. Given that we are a small team, Intersight has simplified the work for us. 

The most valuable feature is the view we get for all the data centers and all the HX nodes using a single portal, rather than having to go into the HX Connect one by one. We've deployed Intersight across our environment and it's doing well, managing our HX nodes and doing all the upgrades. 

This is a complex solution and I sometimes end up having to deal with the firmware from the UCS manager because the UCS isn't upgraded. There's room for building the cluster in two nodes but it needs some enhancement for that. It would benefit us having that and it doesn't require much additional technology, or extra cost.

I've been using this solution for four years. 

I think the major challenge for us and for Cisco Intersight, is the upgrades. We've sometimes asked to go for an upgrade and Cisco has recommended that we take a previous version because it's more stable. There is a difference between the long-term upgrade and the feature upgrade but sometimes you need the new batches to eliminate any vulnerabilities or to fix any bugs.

We only have six users in the company but the solution is scalable. 

The technical support is great. They are always there whenever they're needed regarding the heavy workload that we have in our environment. 

The tech engineers are available 24/7 up there. We had a major issue a year ago and the tech engineer was with us when the problem came up at around 10:00pm. It took about six or seven hours to solve and he was very professional did his job very well.

Positive

I wasn't around for the initial implementation, but I deployed the HX nodes and the clusters for the standard and the edge clusters. It's very complex and requires lots of technical skills, but I enjoyed exploring the new tech. We had an IT system administrator, and a team leader assisting as they have the most experience with the solution. 

We do get a return on our investment. Hyperconverge technology is one of the major technologies right now, especially in consolidating the network and storage tiers. The ROI is a big reduction in pain points and workload regarding the storage and network tier, and also the environment for it.

We didn't evaluate anything else because we have a big profile with Cisco in terms of our network and our scope as system administrators. 

We're currently looking to expand and add the vCenters in Intersight. We're currently working out how to add vCenter and the other nodes, and make sure that all of them are in a healthy state. We're also considering a move to the cloud because of the additional features available. I really recommend using the next-generation M6 servers. It's solid with long-term stability.

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

The tool helps to manage Cisco servers. 

The product's setup should be easier. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The product is stable and I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

I would rate the solution's scalability a ten out of ten. 

The tool's setup is not straightforward. It took three days for the deployment to complete. We collect information and scope from customers and then install the virtual machines. 

You can get a free license for monitoring but need to purchase a license if you need extra control. 

It's deployed on the cloud and on-prem.

Intersight is the best solution with the data center. I like Intersight because of the integration with HashiCorp, Kubernetes, and each cloud because Intersight is the IO module. I like the orchestration of the data center system. Cisco can be integrated with Pure Storage, Veeam, HashiCorp, and Umbrella.

The unique problem with Cisco Intersight is that it's not supporting some players. For example, Dell and ATP. I have a problem with integrating the existing solutions in the data center.

I would like to see integration with the observability solution.

I've been using this solution since 2018.

It's stable.

The cost depends on the case. It's just the standard licensing cost. There are no additional fees. I'm happy with the pricing.

I would rate this solution 9 out of 10.

Cisco Intersight has valuable features for workflow automation and inventory administration.

The product could be easy to use, similar to CloudIQ. Additionally, they should provide more information to make decisions.

We are a Cisco partner. Thus, we communicate directly with cloud specialists in their technical support team.

Positive

The initial setup process is easy.

I rate Cisco Intersight a seven out of ten.

Our organization uses Cisco Intersight since it helps manage our physical infrastructure.

I am still assessing the solution's features since I haven't found it to be all that valuable till now.

There is still some work to be done on the solution. It does take care of the monitoring part but doesn't do it too well. Functionality-wise, it also doesn't manage as well as it used to do in the past.

In the future, the solution needs to plan on an extension to cover a broader range of objects since, at present, there are some Cisco devices within the range of Intersight UCS that it can't manage.

I have been using Cisco Intersight for about six months. I am using the solution in our company. I am using the solution's latest version. My company has a partnership with Cisco Intersight.

The solution's overall stability is pretty fine.

It is a scalable solution.

Only a dozen employees are using the solution in my company.

Our company plans to increase the solution's usage in the future.

The technical support by Cisco is very good. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I use SolarWinds NPM. Though SolarWinds NPM and Cisco Intersight are used for slightly different purposes, they are both essentially used for monitoring.

SolarWinds NPM is able to monitor a much larger range of devices compared to Cisco Intersigh. Intershight can predominantly be used for other Cisco devices only.

The product is deployed on-premises.

The product was easy to implement.

The deployment phase was done in a week.

One person was required for the implementation process.

During the installation procedure, the tool was deployed the way I needed it.

I was involved in the solution's installation.

Market share is one advantage Cisco Intersight has over its competitors.

At present, it is not easy to integrate Cisco Intersight with products from other vendors.

It can be reasonably set up, and it is easy to get it running after that.

The product is good and works with other Cisco devices.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case is for monitoring locations. We are partners with Cisco.

I find the integrations to be the most valuable feature. 

One of the issues is that they are integrating a lot of technologies into the product and when new features appear, the service becomes full of bugs and doesn't work. I have to wait while they go back and make the application stable again. I'd like to see more integration with other companies. 

I've been using this solution for three years. 

The solution is stable most of the time, it's only when new features are added that it becomes less stable. 

The solution is pretty scalable. 

The initial setup is simple. 

I rate this product a seven out of 10.