No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco DNA Center vs Infoblox NetMRI [EOL] comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 DNA Center
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Network Management Applications (2nd), Network Monitoring Software (33rd), Network Automation (2nd)
Infoblox NetMRI [EOL]
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

Mahir Öztürk - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Engineer at NGN Bilgi ve İletişim Hizmetleri
Client history has helped resolve past network issues more efficiently
I mostly use the client history feature of Cisco DNA Center. I didn't use the real-time monitoring capability of Cisco DNA Center because I primarily used it for client history regarding issues and problems. I don't use it for real-time monitoring. If there is a problem, I can inspect the situation and see what is happening, which is beneficial.
it_user1149558 - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Architect at a retailer with 201-500 employees
Has the ability to track and sync through the grid
It would be nice if they restored the network overview of all connected network items. Before it was per site, but now they've made it an overall view of everything and it's quite chaotic because everything is in it instead of per site. It would be nice if they would switch it back to how it was. Additionally, adding your own devices should be made easier. Now you have to do it via technical support to get it incorporated into the new releases. It would be nice if the author generated a graphic network. This could also include the ACL troubleshooting capabilities. But I don't know if that will happen.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We can monitor all devices and get the required information using the product."
"The advice I would give to other people who want to use Cisco DNA Center is to go for it, particularly if they have Cisco infrastructure, though these days integration could be an issue."
"What I found valuable in Cisco DNA Center is the Software-Defined Access Network, so the entire LAN network can be centralized and managed from a single dashboard. Cisco DNA Center is suitable for centralized management and lets you deploy switches in a centralized fashion. You can also do multiple switch port configurations simultaneously and segregate your traffic into multiple fabrics. Another valuable feature of Cisco DNA Center is enhanced security through Scalable Group Tags. Cisco DNA Center can be integrated with your Cisco ISE to enhance the port securities, and this paves the way for Software-Defined Networking in the LAN segment, which is the main advantage of Cisco DNA Center. I also like that you can use Cisco DNA Center for data assurance or correlation. The solution shows your network and client health parameters, which I find convenient for troubleshooting."
"Technical support is excellent. We have pretty good technical support."
"The monitoring features are very useful for network engineers."
"It does a lot of things automatically, and that's the big thing with it. They're making the software so that you don't need to be as knowledgeable as me on the switching and routing side to get your work done. If you want, you can have DNA troubleshoot your problem for you and give you solutions or fix it itself, if it was something that's just a configuration issue."
"It is simple to manage and it is all done from a single dashboard."
"It is very versatile in terms of analytics."
"The features we've found most valuable are the ability to track and sync mac-addresses and switchport information of connected hosts to the Infoblox grid, and also the configuration backups of managed devices."
"Scalable solution for tracking and syncing through the Infoblox grid."
 

Cons

"Cisco DNA Center should improve its configuration management. It is better to have a dev version before pushing it."
"It would be helpful if it could be integrated with a variety of solutions, such as Meraki."
"Better compatibility with third parties and to other Cisco products because if versions are not perfectly matching requirements, it gives a lot of problems."
"One area that needs improvement is the upgrade process."
"It's a very hard software to learn. It's very deep, and when we first got it, there wasn't a whole lot of documentation on it."
"Cisco could improve the security side of their solutions."
"Requires more focus on the digital side of things."
"It seems to be a little bit more centered toward wireless than wired. You've got more options you can do wirelessly than you can with the wired switches, but it works for what we need it to do. We would like to see a little bit more about the traffic, and we're looking at what's out there to see about that. We are looking at something that might give us a bit more insight into the actual traffic. If they had the full functionality on the wired side, as they do on the wireless side in terms of being able to view traffic and everything, it would be good."
"Technical support for the devices should be improved. That should be made easier."
"Lacks network overview for the entire connected network."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is very costly."
"Cisco DNA Center is a licensed product with multiple levels of licensing available such as basic, advanced, and essential. I don't have the exact figure, but Cisco DNA Center is costly. For example, the box has information about the essential license and costs a considerable amount of money. You need to pay extra to use advanced features in Cisco DNA Center. My company sees Cisco DNA Center as a solution that's worth the money, which is why it invested in the solution. If you want centralized management for your network, especially when upgrading it, Cisco DNA Center is perfect, but it's more suitable for a large-scale rather than a small-scale network."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, with ten being expensive."
"We have a three-year license with them."
"Cisco DNA Center is expensive."
"The tool's licensing may not come across as something that may be friendly for users."
"The tool is medium-priced."
"I rate the product's pricing an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Management Applications solutions are best for your needs.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise24
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco DNA Center?
After evaluating other solutions, we will provide feedback.
What needs improvement with Cisco DNA Center?
The deployment of Cisco DNA Center was complex due to the fact that on the data center side, we have a Juniper infrastructure, which created some complexity, though not significant. The deployment ...
What is your primary use case for Cisco DNA Center?
In my organization, we currently have some Cisco devices such as access switches, and we also have infrastructure, but that is not part of our responsibility. We do not manage that infrastructure. ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

DNA Center
NetMRI
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
BlueCross BlueShield
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Fortinet, Skyline Communications and others in Network Management Applications. Updated: September 2026.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.