Cisco 900 Series Integrated Services Routers (ISR) vs. Juniper MX Series

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco 900 Series Integrated Services Routers (ISR)
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
The Cisco 900 Series Industrial ISR (IR 900) series of routers are designed with an open platform to build a highly secure, reliable, and scalable field network infrastructure.N/A
Juniper MX Series
Score 6.4 out of 10
N/A
Juniper Networks describes their MX series as a robust portfolio of SDN-enabled routing platforms that provide system capacity, density, security, and performance with longevity. MX Series routers support digital transformation for service providers, cloud operators, and enterprises.N/A
Pricing
Cisco 900 Series Integrated Services Routers (ISR)Juniper MX Series
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco 900 Series Integrated Services Routers (ISR)Juniper MX Series
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 900 Series Integrated Services Routers (ISR)Juniper MX Series
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
Cisco 900 Series Integrated Services Routers (ISR)Juniper MX Series
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
Cisco Routers
Cisco Routers
Score 8.4 out of 10
Cisco Routers
Cisco Routers
Score 8.4 out of 10
Enterprises
Cisco Routers
Cisco Routers
Score 8.4 out of 10
Cisco Routers
Cisco Routers
Score 8.4 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco 900 Series Integrated Services Routers (ISR)Juniper MX Series
Likelihood to Recommend
8.2
(4 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco 900 Series Integrated Services Routers (ISR)Juniper MX Series
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco
No problems with any of the Cisco 900 Series [Integrated Services Routers] (ISR) platform features within the enterprise environment. Because these devices are running a version of IOS-XE as opposed to traditional IOS, some of the more 'basic' configurations can become more complex. In the end, the 900 Series is still able to provide the required functionality, but there is a learning curve.
Read full review
Juniper Networks
It is well suited as a WAN/Internet Edge device. It is easy to configure BGP, contexts and routing instances. Its suite of tools has saved our organization money by being able to provide services (tag stacking, for example) that our provider would normally charge us more for. Due to interface cost this would not be appropriate as a LAN aggregation device.
Read full review
Pros
Cisco
  • [It] works great full-featured, but [I recommend a] small router for remote sites.
  • [It] can handle more traffic than it even advertises!
  • [It has a] well-priced option for smaller or less critical sites.
Read full review
Juniper Networks
  • It's a robust platform, very resilient. It handles large traffic flows well.
  • It's a flexible architecture, it can be configured with provider or enterprise options (or both!)
  • It has an excellent versioning system, simple commit/confirm/rollback procedures!
Read full review
Cons
Cisco
  • [It has a] pay as you grow model of licensing, but, [in my opinion, is] a pain to implement.
  • [The] service impacting license application [could be improved].
  • Configuration complexity [could be improved].
Read full review
Juniper Networks
  • Sometimes I wish that documentation was more robust, complete, though this has been improved of late.
  • It would be nice if netflow was easier to configure.
  • It would be nice if the platform was cheaper.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Cisco
I have similar feelings about the NCS 5500 Series Router. IOS-XR is great, but the need to upgrade components to support newer features seems like a planning oversight. 400G Linecards are great and needed.... but they need all new power supplies? Really? Also, the ability to use lags across multiple linecards would be nice. I'm pretty sure that's not available, but that is more understandable.
Read full review
Juniper Networks
We preferred Juniper over Cisco for our WAN/Internet routing needs for a number of reasons. First was the price, the Juniper offering was much more competitive than Cisco's. Secondly, was feature set, Juniper's implementation of routing protocols, routing tables, and forwarding options are better thought-out than Cisco's (not to mention Juniper's longstanding use of commit/confirm/rollback features, which Cisco has only started to use recently, and only on some of their products).
Read full review
Return on Investment
Cisco
  • Lots of money saved in downgrading from less useful and older full-sized routers at small sites
  • Time saved having to learn new commands (web GUI works great)
  • Saves time training staff to manage them
Read full review
Juniper Networks
  • Its flexible architecture and configuration styles has saved our organization money by providing feature we would have otherwise needed to purchase from our ISPs.
  • It has a long and healthy lifecycle, with potential upgrades for more performance if needed. (This helps alleviate the downtime associated with chassis replacement.)
  • The only drawback is some of the highest throughput interfaces are expensive.
Read full review
ScreenShots