Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco DNA Center vs OpenText Network Node Manager comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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
Ranking in Network Management Applications
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (18th), Network Automation (2nd)
OpenText Network Node Manager
Ranking in Network Management Applications
10th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Network Management Applications category, the mindshare of Cisco DNA Center is 14.4%, down from 28.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Network Node Manager is 4.4%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Management Applications Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cisco DNA Center14.4%
OpenText Network Node Manager4.4%
Other81.2%
Network Management Applications
 

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.
Ahmed-Salman - PeerSpot reviewer
Performanc Monitoring and Application Architect at Hewlett Packard Enterprise
Reliable network monitoring and proactive analytics enhance decision-making with areas for configuration improvement
NNMi is an OpenText product and serves as the OpenText Network Node Manager monitoring tool. OpenText Network Node Manager is used for network monitoring of switches, routers, firewalls, load balancers, and all network devices. It can support any SNMP protocol. The advantages of OpenText Network Node Manager stand out because it can build the topology, Layer 2 topology, and Layer 3 automatically once devices are added, connecting them together, such as device one, for interface one, connected with interface one on another device. The integration capability of OpenText Network Node Manager is excellent because it integrates directly, and I can configure the integration to feed the CMDB, from where I can get all information from network monitoring into the CMDB, linking it with the infrastructure and correlating events. I use advanced fault monitoring and management features in OpenText Network Node Manager for topology and fault monitoring, as it can alert or generate an event if the value exceeds or falls below a predefined threshold for SNMP traps. The predictive analytics impact planning and optimization strategies because the product can be linked with another product for analytic analysis, allowing me to see the interface utilization trend and proactively take action if the utilization increases. The automated network discovery features and topology mapping in OpenText Network Node Manager have a positive impact. It supports a bundle with another product for NetFlow to monitor traffic, ports, protocols, and SLAs, and I can build compliance reports to address security vulnerabilities, such as identifying all devices using outdated protocols.

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 features include AI-driven insights which make troubleshooting much easier."
"I like that we can easily configure any new hardware. It's also easy to deploy and easy to troubleshoot."
"The product gives a consolidated view."
"The product offers an intuitive and automated way to manage user networks. It gives me an insight into the network health."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable features were the monitoring, maintenance, and configuration."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco DNA Center is the AI (Artificial Intelligence) that provides us with valuable information."
"I think that their LAN automation is a very good feature."
"The best feature is the solution's entire credibility with all vendors."
"Most valuable function would have to the internal causal engine and its root cause analyzer which keep us updated on critical errors and incidents in our network environment."
"It is stable for fault and availability."
"It is a scalable product."
"You can utilize the main file from various vendors for integration."
"Real time network monitoring application: It is very stable, which provides quick root cause analysis (RCA) for any network faults."
"It gives us a good overview of what's happening in our networks and the devices in the networks."
"If you install one node on Network Node Manager and want to scale it up, it's pretty easy to create more nodes."
 

Cons

"The tool's deployment is complex. It also needs to improve its GUI."
"There are some software problems from version to version. It takes a long time for DNA Center to recognize the video and control access devices."
"The solution needs to improve the dashboard."
"Cisco DNA Center was a new technology for us, at the beginning, it was not easy to do, but Cisco did a lot of training with us to a level we could handle everything. The team is managing itself now without the assistance of Cisco."
"The features of Cisco DNA Center and Cisco Prime could have more parity."
"The solution can be quite pricey."
"When it comes to deploying wireless fields, integrating defaults into the DNS interface can be challenging."
"The solution's technical support is an area with which my company's clients have a problem. Cisco doesn't provide good technical support unless a user has a big account that Cisco wants to retain."
"Only to improve the GUI."
"Micro Focus Network Node Manager is not powered to drill down for traffic visibility."
"We have not had a good experience with technical support from OpenText. Many cases take a month to be resolved."
"Right now, we have open tickets and they are not closing as expected."
"The dashboards are not customizable and it's not user-friendly."
"We had some issues with some of the features, some modules are not meeting expectations."
"Reporting. Even though this is available in separate software (iSPI) there is potential in making the reporting more SLA-aware and more intuitive."
"As the technologies evolve, also these solutions or the monitoring tools should evolve to cover the progress in technology, including capabilities related to monitoring of virtualized devices today, as the DNS is on the table in this way."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is very costly."
"The licensing cost for Cisco DNA Center is not more than that of other solutions."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, with ten being expensive."
"The price of the solution is expensive. The hardware is licensed on the device, but the hardware on the server is expensive."
"The solution is expensive."
"The partnership price is notably high, but it ultimately depends on the chosen business model."
"I do know that Cisco does offer some really good promotions for DNA Center to bring the costs down."
"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."
"I wasn't involved in the pricing, but I think it's quite expensive."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"It is more inexpensive than other products in the market."
"The solution is priced mid-range compared to the competition."
"It's an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Management Applications solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
10%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Performing Arts
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise25
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco DNA Center?
The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it gives some kind of ease in operations, especially since our company is moving from CLI to GUI-based configuration.
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?
In my opinion, the client history in Cisco DNA Center can be longer than 10 days, perhaps extending to 15 or 20 days. I am using it in a huge factory in Turkey, and sometimes I need to see what occ...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Network Node Manager?
The disadvantage of OpenText Network Node Manager is related to configuration, which is straightforward since it is agentless and solely relies on SNMP protocol, and although it requires some effor...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Network Node Manager?
I remember working with OpenText Network Node Manager at my previous company. I am now working at a different company focusing on data center migrations and DR preparation. In my current role, I ha...
 

Also Known As

DNA Center
Micro Focus Network Node Manager, Network Node Manager, HPE Network Node Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
IPC, Exelon, VivaCom, 
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco DNA Center vs. OpenText Network Node Manager and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.