# Who has the best NAC solution for large enterprises with complex, segmented networks vs. smaller teams that just need straightforward zero trust access?

<p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">I'm comparing NAC platforms specifically across large enterprises running complex, segmented networks and smaller teams that just want straightforward zero trust access without a heavy lift. Looking at the <a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/categories/network-access-control-nac">network access control</a> category on that split.</p><ul>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/cisco-identity-services-engine-ise/reviews"><strong>Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE)</strong></a> skews enterprise, with reviewers praising deep policy rule sets, microsegmentation through TrustSec, and pxGrid integrations across a broader security stack. The tradeoff is real: reviewers consistently flag a steep learning curve, a sluggish admin GUI on larger deployments, and upgrade processes that require careful sequencing across nodes.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/twingate/reviews"><strong>Twingate</strong></a> is built more for smaller and mid-sized teams, with reviewers describing setup in minutes and a connector that can run on something as small as a Raspberry Pi, though one reviewer specifically noted it lacks some enterprise quality-of-life features like gracefully draining a connector before an upgrade.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/portnox/reviews"><strong>Portnox</strong></a> sits in between, with reviewers across small, mid-market, and enterprise segments citing a working setup within 30 minutes for a basic RADIUS-based wifi deployment.</li>
</ul><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">For teams that started small and grew into a more complex network, did you outgrow your original NAC platform, or did it scale with you without needing a full switch to something like ISE?</p>

##### Post Metadata
- Posted at: 5 days ago
- Author title: SEO Content Specialist
- Net upvotes: 1


## Comments
### Comment 1

&lt;p&gt;The main split is operational complexity: Cisco ISE is built for deep segmentation and policy control, while Twingate optimizes for simpler zero-trust access with far less administration. Portnox sits between them. I’d compare policy depth, deployment effort, upgrade complexity, and whether the platform can absorb growing segmentation requirements without forcing a later migration.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 4 days ago
- Author title: Marketing Executive





## Related discussions
- [How well does Trello scale into a larger team?](https://www.g2.com/discussions/1-how-well-does-trello-scale-into-a-larger-team)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 6
- [Can we please add a new section](https://www.g2.com/discussions/2-can-we-please-add-a-new-section)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 0
- [Quantifiable benefits from implementing your CRM](https://www.g2.com/discussions/quantifiable-benefits-from-implementing-your-crm)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 4