Cisco Catalyst and HPE Ethernet Switches compete in the networking hardware category, specifically targeting enterprise environments. Cisco Catalyst appears to have an edge due to its advanced features and strong support ecosystem, while HPE Ethernet Switches stand out with affordability and simplicity.
Features: Cisco Catalyst Switches include advanced capabilities such as VLAN support, Power over Ethernet (PoE), and robust monitoring tools like RSPAN and IP SLA. They are also stackable and provide both layer 2 and layer 3 functionalities. Users benefit from extensive security features and a well-established support ecosystem. HPE Ethernet Switches offer simplicity, affordability, and integration with other HPE products. They provide a lifetime warranty, Intelligent Resilient Framework (IRF) for resilience, and comprehensive PoE support.
Room for Improvement: Cisco Catalyst Switches are criticized for high costs and complex licensing structures. Users desire more programmability and open networking options alongside a more straightforward configuration process. HPE Ethernet Switches could improve in graphical user interface (GUI) capabilities, stability, and third-party integration. Users also suggest enhancing licensing transparency and expanding QoS features.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Cisco Catalyst Switches are known for robust support, comprehensive documentation, and ease of deployment, but the complexity of the support process is a concern. They provide strong technical backup for on-premises deployments. HPE Ethernet Switches facilitate straightforward deployment and offer good support focused on user-friendly management, though there's room for improvement in response times and support effectiveness.
Pricing and ROI: Cisco Catalyst Switches face criticism for being expensive, with complex pricing and high licensing costs. Despite this, their performance and reliability are deemed worth the investment. HPE Ethernet Switches are seen as cost-effective, with lower initial costs and a good ROI thanks to features like a lifetime warranty. Their competitive pricing makes them attractive, avoiding the high licensing fees typical with Cisco products.
From an investment standpoint, deploying Cisco Catalyst Switches offers tangible benefits, including cost reductions.
On a scale from one to 10, I would rate the technical support of Cisco at 10 out of 10.
Cisco's support is good, one of the best supports that you will get.
Cisco support is very good and responsive.
We attach SKUs that offer an advanced replacement of the hardware in the worst-case scenario.
Their customer service and support are quite good.
The scalability of Cisco Catalyst Switches is very much scalable, as it supports the stacking feature and growth; for instance, with 94K modular switches, based on the requirement, we can even increase modules for more bandwidth.
Cisco Catalyst Switches are scalable, and I would rate them eight to nine out of ten for scalability.
HPE Ethernet Switches are highly scalable.
Cisco Catalyst Switches are stable.
HPE Ethernet Switches are very reliable and have high stability.
We had one incident where an electric overload occurred, and it still managed to stay operational.
Currently, I don't see much AI integration with Cisco Catalyst Switches; though they've started, it still needs improvement.
The configuration options on the Cisco Commerce website could be more efficient.
There could be improvements in the repeat configuration with some file integration that is currently missing.
Incorporating them into an existing infrastructure with competitor products is a challenging task which could be better streamlined.
The price should be reduced in comparison to Cisco, as sometimes we cannot use the HPE one at the core level, where generally public users are using Cisco.
Cisco provides unique features that justify their pricing.
Cisco Catalyst Switches are quite pricey.
Cisco usually is costly compared to other vendors.
Huawei would be even cheaper than Aruba.
The price of HPE Ethernet Switches is reasonable and less than other OEM brands.
Cisco Catalyst Switches are valuable for their reliability and performance.
The most beneficial features for our network management are their stability and good customer support.
Catalyst Switches are efficient and swift, which is valuable for my organization.
They are highly scalable and stable, which is vital for large enterprises that require reliable performance.
The security features of the HPE Ethernet Switches are good.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Cisco Catalyst Switches | 2.8% |
| HPE Ethernet Switches | 2.8% |
| Other | 94.4% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 78 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 29 |
| Large Enterprise | 78 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 62 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 19 |
| Large Enterprise | 31 |
Cisco Catalyst Switches are a reliable and scalable network switching and routing solution, focusing on VLANs and VLAN switching. They are used as access switches, distribution switches, and core switches in various environments, deployed on-premises, and used for long connections. The switches are easy to configure, install, and upgrade and offer good pricing.
The most valuable features include warranty and firmware support, stability, security, good performance, flexibility, etc. The Cisco Catalyst Switches have provided a stable solution for the organizations and are widely used, trusted, and well-known in the networking industry.
HP has created the most open, integrated and software-defined networking portfolio and ecosystem of its kind – driving simplification with networks that understand, adapt to and protect your business applications in real-time. Only HP extends the momentum of software-defined networking everywhere–from the mobile edge to the heart of data centers.
We monitor all Ethernet Switches 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.
