Cisco Container Platform [EOL] vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform comparison

Cisco and Red Hat are both solutions in the Container Management category. Additionally, 100% of Cisco users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Cisco Container Platform [EOL]

Read 1 Cisco Container Platform [EOL] review

100% willing to recommend

Red Hat OpenShift Container...

Read 52 Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform reviews

7,514 Views
7,439 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Cisco Container Platform [EOL]

Red Hat OpenShift Container...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Cisco Container Platform [EOL] and Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Kubernetes and others in Container Management.

To learn more, read our detailed Container Management Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Container Management

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,665 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

Cisco Container Platform [EOL]

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Red Hat OpenShift Container...

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Container Management (1st)

Featured Reviews

Cole McKnight

Cloud Architect, Feltus Lab at Clemson University

Enables the deployment/management of Kubernetes clusters from multiple resource providers at one location

One thing I have not really had the chance to explore too much is the Cisco Container Platform command-line interface. I've been told that exists and it's functional, but I'm not sure if it's really made for end-users. It might just be for admins or developers. One thing that is a little bit annoying about Cisco Container Platform is that for each cluster you create you have to go through the same web form each time. If you're creating two identical clusters, you still have to go through that web form twice. What's really nice about most platforms is that they have command-line interfaces where you can just copy a single command which has all the flags with all the configurations you want and put that in a text file. Then, when you want to create another cluster you can just paste that in and edit one or two flags if you want to. You don't have to go through a web form every time and that is a feature that I would like to see in the future with CCP. It would be nice, at the end, once you create a cluster using the web form, if it would give you a single command that you could copy and put somewhere and then paste it, in the future, to create an identical cluster or an almost identical cluster. I would like the ability to save cluster configurations to CCP. I've provided that feedback to the development team. There might even be a version that is out which already has that functionality integrated into it. I think it's safe to say that at some point in the future that feature will be provided.

Read full review

Nelandran Moodley

Solaris UNIX Systems Engineer at Standard Bank South Africa

Consistent performance impresses users while technical support needs improvement

I definitely recommend Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform to other organizations due to its high availability, security, ease of use, and all the built-in features it offers. We do no maintenance for Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform since ROSA is fully managed, and that's why it is a bit more expensive than EKS. The fully managed service includes 24/7 support, scheduling, and upgrades; we only need to inform Red Hat support about upgrades, and they manage the process end to end. Overall, I rate Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform as a nine; although I would say ten, I think it's important to allow room for improvement.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is definitely the fact that you can use a single platform to deploy to different resource providers. Right now, the version I'm using has vSphere and AWS, but I know in the future they're planning on adding more. The ability to deploy clusters on-prem or to any number of public cloud providers is really valuable because you don't need to relearn or switch platforms to switch resource providers."

"The most valuable features are the monitoring and logging functionalities."

"The auto scalability feature, which is based on smart agendas, determined from pre-prepared rules is the most valuable feature. You can also create different routes for deployment. Deployment types can be provided with an identifier, such as an ARB deployment. This really helped in rolling out releases without disrupting services for the end-users."

"The console or the GUI of OpenShift is awesome. You can do a lot of things from there. You can perform administration tasks as well as development tasks."

"The software is user-friendly and straightforward to use, which is favorable to a developer."

"On OpenShift, it's easy to scale applications. We can easily scale up or scale down."

"It is easy to expand."

"The solution's security throughout the stack and the software supply chain is very reliable. When it was on-prem, it was by default secured by our company firewalls and security tools, and now it's in the cloud, which has its security and systems in place. This provides stability to our infrastructure."

"The solution is stable. However, it depends on the integrations of the solution on how stable it will be, such as what tools you integrate with."

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform pros

Cons

"One thing that is a little bit annoying about Cisco Container Platform is that for each cluster you create you have to go through the same web form each time. If you're creating two identical clusters, you still have to go through that web form twice."

"One area for improvement is that we can't currently run Docker inside a container, as it clashes with security consents. It would be good if we could change that."

"The UI could be more user-friendly to drive tasks more effectively through the interface."

"It is difficult to deploy the OpenShift cluster in a bare-metal environment."

"Things are there and the documentation is there, however, there still needs to be quick guides available."

"The support costs are too high."

"The product monitoring tool does not work for us."

"There are some occasions when support from Red Hat is not what we expect; in instances of outages, it sometimes takes a substantial amount of time to resolve issues."

"The setup process is not great."

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"OpenShift pricing varies by region. For example, a simple cluster with three nodes in DAL-10 might cost around $560 to $580 per month, subject to specific configurations like memory and CPU cores."

"If you buy the product for a year or three, you get a lot of discounts...I feel that the product is worth its cost, especially since setting it up can be done with just a few clicks."

"The product is expensive."

"OpenShift with Red Hat support is pretty costly. We have done a comparison between AWS EKS (Elastic Kubernetes Services) which provides fully managed services from AWS. It's built on open-source-based Kubernetes clusters and it is much cheaper compared to Red Hat, but it is a little expensive compared to ECS provided by AWS."

"The pricing is a bit more expensive than expected."

"The price is slightly on the higher side. It is something that can be worked on because most of the businesses now have margins."

"The solution is expensive, and I rate it an eight out of ten. There is a subscription called OpenShift Plus, which offers additional features and products the vendor provides to complement the OpenShift Container Platform. These include ACM, Red Hat Quay, and Red Hat OpenShift Data Foundation."

"We currently have an annual license renewal."

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	40

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Which is better - OpenShift Container Platform or VMware Tanzu Mission Control?

Red Hat Openshift is ideal for organizations using microservices and cloud environments. I like that the platform is auto-scalable, which saves overhead time for developers. I think Openshift can b...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OpenShift Container Platform?

Regarding whether Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform is expensive or if the price is reasonable for my customers, to me, the services it provides should incur some costs, but based on market feed...

See all answers

What needs improvement with OpenShift Container Platform?

Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform needs some improvements, for example, in upgrade time, as normally, an extended upgrade method should be allowed, but sometimes if anyone clicks twice, it tries...

See all answers

Comparisons

No data available

Amazon EKS vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 61% of the time

Nutanix Kubernetes Platform (NKP) vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 10% of the time

HashiCorp Nomad vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 6% of the time

Kubernetes vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 3% of the time

Docker vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 2% of the time

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Container Management

January 2026

Download Cisco Container Platform [EOL] product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

January 2026

Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform report

Download Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform product report

Also Known As

Cisco CCP

No data available

Overview

Cisco Container Platform is a fully curated, lightweight container management platform for production grade environments, powered by Kubernetes, and delivered with Cisco enterprise-class support. It reduces the complexity of configuring, deploying, securing, scaling and managing containers via automation coupled with Cisco’s best practices for security and networking. Cisco Container Platform is built with an open architecture using open source components, so you're not locked in to any single vendor. It works across both on-premises and public cloud environments. And because it’s optimized with Cisco HyperFlex, this preconfigured, integrated solution sets up in minutes.

Cisco

Red Hat® OpenShift® offers a consistent hybrid cloud foundation for building and scaling containerized applications. Benefit from streamlined platform installation and upgrades from one of the enterprise Kubernetes leaders.

Red Hat

Sample Customers

Clemson University

Edenor, BMW, Ford, Argentine Ministry of Health

Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Kubernetes and others in Container Management. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Container Management vendors.

We monitor all Container Management 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.