Cisco Nexus Reviews

Our primary use case for the Cisco Nexus solution is network connectivity.

It's based on the Cisco line of products, so a lot of people are trained with them.

The most valuable feature of this solution is user configurability.

In the next release of this solution, Cisco should keep trending on ease-of-use, with more human or regular language and commands.

Maybe they could add some machine learning and AI integration. Ease-of-use and making things more human-readable is most important.

Cisco Nexus is very stable.

It is very scalable.

The Cisco Nexus technical support is very good.

We needed to invest in a new solution because of speed. We used older versions of Cisco Cloud. The reason why we switched was just adapting with the times.

The initial setup is straightforward with the right training. Search out there, find a lot of knowledge before you begin.

I did the setup myself.

The license on a yearly basis is $200,000.

Cisco was on the shortlist with Extreme and Juniper. We chose Cisco because there was integration with other Cisco equipment in the data center.

On a scale from one to 10, I would rate Cisco Nexus an eight to nine.

The primary uses of this solution are for managing email servers, EIP modules, and file servers.

Cisco Nexus meets all of our requirements.

I feel that this solution should be more flexible and scalable.

We have been using Cisco Nexus for approximately seven years.

We are using the latest version.

It's a stable solution. We do not have any issues with it.

Scalability needs improvement.

We use a local distributor for support, which is very expensive.

The initial setup was straightforward, and the deployment was easy.

I am not aware of the costs for this solution, it is handled by the accounting department.

I recommend this solution to other users who are interested in using it.

I would rate Cisco Nexus an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is for our data center environment.

The flexibility, how accurately the VPCs operate as well as the redundancy built into it with the VPCs are the most valuable features. 

I would like to see improved ISSU.

It's a stable solution, but there are a few bugs here and there in it and it would be nice if they weren't there. The Mac looping is an issue as well. 

The ISSUs sometimes go down.

It's very scalable. You can go up or down in size as much as you want. 

Their technical support is outstanding. We had some issues at the core layer in our Nexus data center, and the 7Ks were hitting a bug, and we couldn't figure that out until we got really deep into debugs. Their tech support was able to resolve that. 

We had our Cisco account rep and they helped us figure out what the right solution was for us.

The initial setup was rather complex because it was my first time deploying Nexus, and you have to turn on all the features to make them all work and that's something that you don't have in any other Cisco switch. It threw me for a loop. But once you figure out the resources and setting up the VDCs and everything, you're good.

I deployed this solution myself. 

We definitely got ROI from Nexus and a pretty short term because the pure redundancy and the uptime, is a real value add for us.

We were using another solution and we went with Cisco because it has more features. Also because Cisco is reliably good; nobody ever got fired for choosing Cisco.

We were looking at Arista and Juniper, but we ended up going with Cisco, mainly because of the features.

I would rate this product a pretty solid eight out of ten because it's been pretty reliable and good and it's done what it's supposed to do. There's been a little bit of bugginess in the code, but that happens.

I would consider the cost and functionality that you need and consider this in between ACI and a Nexus deployment. Right now, ACI isn't super mature, and if you don't have people that are able to actually dig in and really learn ACI, Nexus still might be the best solution.

Our primary use case of this solution is to provide Nexus 9000 in different models for the user on top of our switches or as core switches. It depends on the design and the customer's needs.

The product has improved the way our organization functions in the way that we have been able to implement this product in many customer's sites and it has been running for one of our main customer's enterprise sine 2014.

The most valuable features are that it is easy to use, provides stability, easy to configure, low latency, and it provides communication to the data center. 

In terms of improvement, the stacking between the two switches in the higher availability model should be similar to Catalyst. It's better to have one interface for configuration.

I hope to see more features for high-availability configuration such as a VSS configuration on the Catalyst series. To have one management console for both chassis. I also hope to see the dependency on the management interface for high-availability lowered.

What needs improvement is the price on the DNA subscription. It's obligatory for all the switches and you should have the option to remove it or keep it as optional. Cisco has the option to remove it now. We have agreed that in the future, they will offer a permanent license for it.

It's stable. 

Nexus has good scalability features. It provides the customer's needs.

The solution's technical support is good. We had to deal with some cases and the response times were very good. It met expectations. Response time was amazing. The customer was satisfied. 

We used to have another solution and used other products. This product provides us with better high-performance support at a good price.

The initial set up was very straightforward. It is easy to follow and we didn't have any obstacles during the implementation.

We used both a reseller and a product consultant.

Cisco Nexus has provided a good initial cost for our customers with minimum renewal fees over the next few years.

Customers do not understand the new licenses or subscription very well. Cisco should work on this. 

The subscription for licensing is expensive while other vendors provide a switch with everything at a lower price.

We previously used Catalyst 6500. 

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would rate Cisco Nexus a nine because it has helped us a lot with our customers. There's always room for improvement.

I would advise someone considering this solution to go for it. It's a stable product. 

We use Nexus primarily for our data centers.

It's pretty easy to use and operates at high speed.

The most valuable feature for us is its speed capacity.

Upgrade and promote catalyst switches to the Nexus, it's a lot faster.

As far as we can tell, it's stable.

They're pretty scalable.

All of our old stuff was end of life. We used Catalyst 4948 before.

The initial setup was somewhat complex. There were a lot of moving parts and we needed to get everybody going in the right direction. It didn't take very long though.

We used a reseller called Sirius for the deployment. They were pretty good.

We didn't look at any other vendors.

I would rate this product as an eight out of ten, because it's a pretty good product. It's stable and reliable.

It's definitely worth it.

We use this solution in our data center.

This solution has allowed us to scale bigger than ever.

The most valuable feature is that it is high-density, ten-gig.

The code quality for this solution has gotten worse and needs improvement.

The hardware is stable, but the code quality has gotten worse.

The scalability of this solution is great.

Cisco's technical support is great.

I have always used Cisco products.

The initial setup of this solution is complex, but that is expected. You have to put a lot of thought into it.

My advice to anybody implementing this solution is to plan ahead six months.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We primarily use this solution for data centers in places like high schools or businesses that support other businesses.

This solution improves network speed and provides high availability for our users.

The most valuable features are the high availability and the basic configurations that we can implement.

I would like to see a central management solution in order to have all of the equipment in one place.

Also, more documentation and more design examples would help us to reach other clients.

I have seen an improvement in the stability of our network with this solution.

This solution is very scalable.

This solution has excellent technical support.

I have experience with the A2K and the Nexus.

The initial setup is complex, but we have a lot of very good documentation.

We used an integrator and a consultant for the implementation. They were pretty good, it was easy and it was very nice for the clients.

Our licensing costs for this solution are approximately $200 USD per month.

We were already working with Cisco.

This is a good solution

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We use this solution for many purposes. For example, to automate Nexus switches and to view the modern architecture network, such as SDN.

The most valuable features are the solution is robust, you are able to use it for fabric architecture as well as SPAN on exit with the controller.

Nexus switches should be able to support network function virtualization (NFV).

I have been using the solution for approximately five years.

I have found Cisco Nexus switches highly scalable.

This solution is very scalable because of the architecture. We have approximately 400 users using this solution in my organization.

I am satisfied with the Cisco support, they are very good. 

The installation is very easy and it took me approximately 10 minutes to install.

We did the implementation of the solution ourselves. We have a few administrators that do the implementation and maintenance of the solution. We do not need a really big team because it can be automated, we need them mostly for orchestration.

I rate Cisco Nexus a nine out of ten.