# OPSWAT MetaAccess vs Cisco ISE: which do AI models recommend for NAC, October 2026

IT AI Recommendation Index, October 2026 Edition, Network access control. One of fourteen models named OPSWAT MetaAccess first on the direct prompt; zero named Cisco ISE. Page: https://it-ai-index.com/network/network-access-control/opswat-metaaccess-vs-cisco-ise/

| | First-choice share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Models naming it |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OPSWAT MetaAccess | 7% | #3 of 10 | 0% | 12 | 7 of 14 |
| Cisco ISE | 2% | #5 of 10 | 51% | 35 | 13 of 14 |

## The direct prompt, model by model

- Llama 4 Maverick: opswat metaaccess first (first choices: OPSWAT MetaAccess) (alternatives: Portnox Cloud)
- Grok 4.1 Fast: neither first, one named (first choices: Portnox CLEAR) (alternatives: OPSWAT MetaAccess)
- Mistral Small: neither first, one named (first choices: Portnox CLEAR) (alternatives: Cisco ISE, Fortinet FortiNAC)
- MiniMax M2.5: neither first, one named (first choices: Portnox Cloud) (alternatives: HPE Aruba ClearPass, Ivanti Policy Secure, OPSWAT MetaAccess)
- GPT-6 Luna: neither first, one named (first choices: Portnox Cloud) (alternatives: Cisco ISE, FortiNAC, HPE Aruba Networking ClearPass)
- Claude Haiku 4.5: neither named (first choices: Cloudflare One, Jamf Zero Trust) (alternatives: Fortinet FortiGate, Microsoft Entra ID)
- GPT-5.4 mini: neither named (first choices: Aruba ClearPass) (alternatives: Cisco Identity Services Engine, FortiNAC, Portnox Cloud)
- Gemini 3.5 Flash: neither named (first choices: Portnox Cloud) (alternatives: Fortinet FortiNAC, HPE Aruba ClearPass, macmon NAC)
- Perplexity Sonar: neither named (first choices: Portnox Cloud) (alternatives: Forescout, Fortinet FortiNAC, HPE Aruba ClearPass)
- DeepSeek V4 Flash: neither named (first choices: Portnox CLEAR, Portnox Cloud) (alternatives: Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC)
- Qwen 3.7 Flash: neither named (first choices: Portnox CLEAR) (alternatives: Cisco Identity Services Engine, HPE Aruba ClearPass)
- Kimi K2: neither named (first choices: Portnox CLEAR) (alternatives: FortiNAC)
- GLM 4.7 FlashX: neither named (first choices: Portnox Cloud) (alternatives: HPE Aruba ClearPass, Ivanti Policy Secure)
- Muse Glimmer 30B: neither named (first choices: OPSWAT MetaAccess / MetaDefender NAC, Portnox CLEAR)

## What the models said about OPSWAT MetaAccess

- "Portnox Cloud or OPSWAT MetaAccess give you device profiling, posture enforcement and guest/BYOD without standing up dedicated appliances." (Muse Glimmer 30B, paraphrase prompt, first choice)
- "OPSWAT MetaAccess - Cited as one of the most accessible entries for small organizations" (MiniMax M2.5, budget prompt, first choice)
- "The best network access control solution for a mid-market B2B company is OPSWAT MetaAccess" (Llama 4 Maverick, direct prompt, first choice)

## What the models said about Cisco ISE

- "Avoid Cisco ISE unless you're already deeply committed to Cisco and have the operational maturity to manage its complexity." (Kimi K2, paraphrase prompt, hard negative)
- "What to Avoid - Cisco ISE and Aruba ClearPass – While excellent solutions, they are typically expensive and complex" (Kimi K2, budget prompt, hard negative)
- "Avoid Cisco/Aruba/Forescout – these are enterprise-priced" (DeepSeek V4 Flash, budget prompt, hard negative)
- "Cisco ISE is the enterprise standard for organizations that want policy depth, identity‑based segmentation, and tight Cisco ecosystem integration." (GLM 4.7 FlashX, comparative prompt, first choice)
- "Best low-budget enterprise option: Cisco ISE Essentials if you already use Cisco gear or want a mainstream enterprise NAC." (GPT-5.4 mini, budget prompt, first choice)
- "Choose Cisco ISE if you're deeply invested in Cisco and need the most feature-rich enterprise solution" (Kimi K2, comparative prompt, first choice)

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category. Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category. Published under CC BY 4.0; the output is the models' output, and nothing here is a recommendation by the index.