TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller vs. Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller

    Score8.4 out of 10
    N/AThe Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller is a highly scalable, service-rich, resilient, and flexible platform. It provides centralized control, management, and troubleshooting for high-scale deployments in service provide, enterprise, and large campus deployments.N/A

    Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers

    Score9 out of 10
    N/AThe Cisco Catalyst 9800-80 is a modular wireless controller with optional 100 Gigabit Ethernet (G) modular uplinks boasting seamless software updates for large enterprises and campuses, and security with ETA and SD-Access.N/A
    Pricing
    Cisco 8540 Wireless ControllerCisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Cisco 8540 Wireless ControllerCisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    Cisco 8540 Wireless ControllerCisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
    Considered Both Products
    Cisco
    Chose Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller
    N/A -- Product was already selected for taking over current position with company.
    Incentivized
    Chose Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller
    We upgraded to the latest model of Cisco recently and both the Cisco 8540 and Cisco 9800 are great in their jobs (although a few additional improvements along with the latest technology and AP controls are observed in the later model). The buyers can choose either of these two …
    Incentivized
    Cisco
    Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
    We are moving into a more unified and centralized design, and the benefits offered by the 9800 compared to the above listed 5520 series and 8500 series of wireless controller is much preferred. The staggered upgrade option is again another feature much improved moving to the …
    Incentivized
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    92%
    Would buy again
    24 Answers
    99%
    Would buy again
    103 Answers
    Delivers good value for the price
    92%
    Delivers good value for the price
    22 Answers
    96%
    Delivers good value for the price
    92 Answers
    Happy with the feature set
    100%
    Happy with the feature set
    26 Answers
    97%
    Happy with the feature set
    101 Answers
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    100%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    20 Answers
    94%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    76 Answers
    Implementation went as expected
    95%
    Implementation went as expected
    21 Answers
    86%
    Implementation went as expected
    83 Answers
    Best Alternatives
    Cisco 8540 Wireless ControllerCisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
    Small Businesses
    WatchGuard Secure Wi-Fi Cloud
    Score9.1 out of 10
    WatchGuard Secure Wi-Fi Cloud
    Score9.1 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    Cisco Aironet 1800 Series Access Points (discontinued)
    Score8.5 out of 10
    Cisco Aironet 1800 Series Access Points (discontinued)
    Score8.5 out of 10
    Enterprises
    Cisco Catalyst 9100 Access Points
    Score9.2 out of 10
    Cisco Catalyst 9100 Access Points
    Score9.2 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Cisco 8540 Wireless ControllerCisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
    Likelihood to Recommend
    7.0
    (27 ratings)
    9.0
    (109 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.7
    (6 ratings)
    Usability
    7.0
    (2 ratings)
    9.0
    (2 ratings)
    Availability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.9
    (107 ratings)
    Performance
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.7
    (108 ratings)
    Support Rating
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    8.5
    (3 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    Configurability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    10.0
    (1 ratings)
    Ease of integration
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    Product Scalability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    10.0
    (1 ratings)
    Vendor post-sale
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    Vendor pre-sale
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Cisco 8540 Wireless ControllerCisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Cisco
    [Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller's] software quality has been shed in recent years. The only problem I have with it is its inability to work with older Cisco Access Points. However, that's to be expected for any deployment. While the controller's UI works well, some areas could be improved. API integrations lack flexibility. [I feel] it's time for policy redesign. It can be a little difficult to determine coding quality.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cisco
    Well suited for most of our customer base because it is a versatile, scalable, large multi-campus organizations. Not so: Brandish deployments where there's a much more simplified feature set needed. So where we can basically rely on Meraki as a cloud base with easier to deploy.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Cisco
    • The GUI on the Cisco 8540 WLC is much better designed than other Cisco products. Its easy to navigate between the different settings to find what is needed.
    • The AP groups allows touching multiple APs at one time.
    • It also allows us to create standard SSIDs that can be used at all sites that connect back to it, this saves a lot of time instead of hitting each site with a local controller.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cisco
    • I think the updates are great. ISSU upgrading code is fantastic. I think the speed with which CAPWAP converges or reconverges, I think the redundancy mechanisms for roaming APs to other controllers is very good. I think overall, getting away from more of a monolithic processor where subprocesses handle what they call the WNCD tasks, I think fundamentally is an improvement in performance.
    • The radioactive tracing, all of the troubleshooting and all of the logging and all of the importing and exporting features for logging and analytics within the controller itself is really, really good compared to the predecessor AireOS.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Cisco
    • Code quality is a bit hit and miss. This will be great for a while, then things will be bad for a while, then we'll do it again. The UI of the controller works, but could do with a refresh, and I would like to see some improvement on layout and organization.
    • The constant code/firmware upgrades and the QA of new code could be better.
    • Maybe the compatibility with old Cisco Access Points could be improved, but it's normal in all kinds of deployments.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cisco
    • The biggest issues we have had have been software related. Requiring code upgrades or reloads to fix an unfixable problem.
    • Some of the troubleshooting utilities aren't perfectly clear as to what theyre doing or how to set them up or what to expect results wise or resource wise.
    • I think there is a lack of filtering in certain displays where you cannot use the "contains" option for certain device type filtering. But those options should be universal in all views.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    Cisco
    No answers on this topic
    Cisco
    Despite common software and hardware issues this is still the best product on the market for large scale enterprise deployments. Cisco has worked with us extensively to reduce the amount of bugs in every iteration however new bugs are introduced or new incompatibilities always arise with major releases. Thus, while I'm hesitant to recommend the product it's still much better than all the other competitors such as Aruba and Juniper in the WIFi space. There is also extensive integration with DNAC/Catalyst Center and ISE in an SDA deployment. Recently there has been a number of critical issues with the controller software and Cisco has proved themselves to be incapable of timely troubleshooting and diagnosis. This has reduced our confidence in the product and it's current and future stability and maintainability. At it's current state the product is taking up too much of our engineering resources to maintain despite also paying for premium support from Cisco. As such I have reduced by rating as we are likely to look at alternative vendors for our long-term wireless management solution
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    Cisco
    Very feature rich, easy enough for beginners to understand layout and initial setup. Need a good training (online, Cisco Leaning Network, etc.) to fully understand all features and product capabilities. Strict power requirements for APs are only major drawback for our specific implementation.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cisco
    It's not simple, but this is the result of being very deeply configurable
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Reliability and Availability
    Cisco
    No answers on this topic
    Cisco
    Honestly, in the six years that we've been using it, we've had one, I would say show stopping event. There was an issue with in an HA setup they would every so often when rebooted lose all configuration. So that was a bit disappointing, required quite a few hours to resolve, but Cisco had to fix very quickly and once we implemented that, we've not had any further additional issues.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Performance
    Cisco
    No answers on this topic
    Cisco
    We have been using the Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers for over 2 years and the whole system has been very stable. We currently run them in HA and have found when this has been activated (due to power issues etc.) the units change roles seamlessly, minimising the downtime to almost nothing. Except when we have had major issues, our wireless networks have a solid uptime and keeps our whole borough up 24/7 without problems.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    Cisco
    It is a better product. The evolution is positive.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cisco
    the overall support on the 9800 Wireless lan controller is good. Wireless issues are sometimes hard to troubleshoot since it's the RF that make it complex and the diversity in clients and requirements. The engineers do a good job in understanding the scope and issue, altough not all issues can be solved
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Implementation Rating
    Cisco
    No answers on this topic
    Cisco
    You need to understand wifi basics
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    Cisco
    We have [done] some work before with the Cisco 3504 product, but the more recent Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller provides a wider range of capabilities for managing the wireless network and each individual device [and] also being able to handle more users. Unfortunately, we didn't test and deploy equivalent products from other concurrent companies.
    Read full review
    Cisco
    Ubiquiti WLAN is very much a consumer platform. It is not production ready, it is buggy, it has issues. It is cheaper than Cisco, but you get what you pay for. Aruba doesn't integrate nicely with our existing largely Cisco based networks, so when time came to replace AireOS, the Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers came out on top.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Scalability
    Cisco
    No answers on this topic
    Cisco
    There are different vesrions for different requirements, there's HA as well.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Cisco
    • The Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller allows you to reduce your hardware footprint of wireless controllers deployed in your environment. Instead of having a controller per site deployed, you can have a couple of 8540 controllers in your data center that can handle up 6000 Access Points.
    • Some of the savings on hardware cost is offset by the cost of redundant WAN circuits. The access points will continue to function when connectivity to the Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller is unreachable, but it will not allow any new connections in that wireless environment.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cisco
    • Positive impacts, yeah, is good to have a central location to control all these profiles for different countries and locations. And the drawback, like I said to you really because of the too many integrations that have a dependency on the software version. For example, Cisco ONE for Access have certain software that can run through and then this scatter center need to make sure it's working with the others APS version that is currently working. And we also, the Cisco Catalyst Center also have some kind another version of software that you need to support this controller. So it's like two tier three tiers of the software version that we need to match. Then only it can work.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots