We performed a comparison between Apache Web Server and NGINX Plus based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Infrastructure solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"Apache Web Server can be used as a proxy server"
"Apache Web Server is free of cost."
"The product's initial setup phase is straightforward."
"The open-source nature is one of its most significant advantages."
"Its community is its most valuable feature. Solving problems is easier on Apache because so many people know this product."
"It's reliable, configurable and generally secure."
"The solution offers good security."
"The product is very cheap and stable."
"The product is resilient."
"I need to highlight that the number one thing about NGINX is that it is free."
"The load balancing module, which is equivalent to LTM, is the focus of the PSE. So far, the features of both are identical. I believe NGINX has more features for securing these services, but in terms of load balancing, both are massive solutions."
"Nginx is simple to configure, very stable in a highly utilized environment and very modular, allowing DevOps to create it's own modules for interactive use with Nginx."
"Zero Downtime has always been a strength in recommending infrastructure web services. NGINX allows me to execute such infrastructure with less complications and the ability to switch from server to server easily."
"The flexibility of its modules allow it to be scalable."
"Nginx is extremely efficient in terms of the connection rate to the CPU cycles ratio, and in terms of the bandwidth to CPU cycles."
"This solution has everything."
"So far, for us, everything is okay."
"The GUI for the less experienced users needs some improvement. For some companies, it is hard to configure it if they have not had any experience."
"The interface has room for improvement."
"There isn't a dedicated customer support available"
"Its stability could be better."
"I want the user interface to be more user-friendly."
"For NGINX, I think it has NGINX Management Suite, which is GUI-based and allows you to manage your configuration via the user interface, but Apache fails to offer such capabilities to users."
"Lacks integration with some cloud solutions."
"Lack of a feature to print data on the terminal for verification of network traffic during debugging and testing."
"The solution must improve its performance."
"I would suggest adding GUI-based configuration panels to NGINX Plus to simplify setup and management tasks."
"The drawback is that you must obtain a license for everything."
"If NGINX brings some features for health check in the open source version, it would be better. "
"It would be good if NGINX provided a graphical user interface."
"Our most challenging part was to run an older PHP website reverse-proxied through NGINX. That was not fun."
"The KPI should be more focused on load balancing and the latency in application calling from the end system."
Apache Web Server is ranked 3rd in Application Infrastructure with 22 reviews while NGINX Plus is ranked 2nd in Application Infrastructure with 28 reviews. Apache Web Server is rated 8.6, while NGINX Plus is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Apache Web Server writes "Has good security, speed and traffic handling features ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX Plus writes "Quick installation and very easy to manage while doing orchestration or automation". Apache Web Server is most compared with IIS, IBM WebSphere Application Server, Microsoft .NET Framework, Zend PHP Engine and JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, whereas NGINX Plus is most compared with IIS, HAProxy, Kemp LoadMaster, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Citrix NetScaler. See our Apache Web Server vs. NGINX Plus report.
See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Infrastructure reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
