We performed a comparison between Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure and Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, VMware, Nutanix and others in HCI."When using new (warranty) servers, you can forget about the storage service for several years. The users will not even notice the failure of two servers out of three."
"We have experienced multiple hardware failures at one site and the fault-tolerant volume worked exactly as expected with zero downtime."
"StarWind vSAN was very easy to integrate into our system and ran flawlessly during our entire use time."
"It is easy to use and can monitor system synchronization and check Storage status. StarWind Virtual SAN (VSAN) combines flash and disks of the cluster and forms a virtual shared storage “pool” accessible by all hosts. StarWind cuts down virtualization cost and complexity by eliminating the need for a physical shared storage (SAN). -StarWind offers the Enterprise-level high availability (HA), deployed and easily configured . we get technical support from star wind team when implementation software and after setup if we face any issue."
"The StarWind Virtual SAN provides a clever and unique solution to the Computing Split Brain problem."
"Given the high availability of the server cluster, we were able to reduce separate physical servers onto one hyper-converged cluster - this saved in OPEX and CAPEX costs immediately, along with licensing costs of the Windows Server licenses."
"StarWind vSAN is a great solution to create a redundant two-node-only Hyper-V cluster, both for domain or workgroup scenarios."
"StarWind Virtual SAN is a highly flexible solution, as it can be deployed on physical servers or on top of virtual machines running on hypervisors such as VMware vSphere and Microsoft Hyper-V."
"I like that you can add other types of services."
"Both the scalability and stability of this solution are excellent."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The most useful feature is the solution's automation in terms of how we are able to spin up a certain workload in real-time when we are doing R&D."
"The consolidation of the management in one control point is the most valuable. The whole infrastructure management is consolidated in just one console point. The documentation is also pretty good."
"The size of the hardware is what we need because it is very good for small configurations."
"It was not expensive at all."
"The most valuable feature is the three nodes and the free hypervisor."
"The Continuous Data Protection (CDP) feature is one of the good features."
"I am impressed with the product's firewall and virtualization."
"Sangfor HCI's best features are the ability to scale to a bigger size and the roadmap, whereby if they need to replicate their production to disaster recovery, they can do so on the same platform."
"I would rate the user-friendliness an eight out of ten."
"I find the simplicity of Sangfor very valuable. It is easy to configure and user-friendly. The overall user experience as well as the usability of Sangfor is outstanding."
"We find the topology feature of Sangfor HCI particularly valuable."
"They require more media visibility."
"The console is something that I feel could be improved. There is nothing technically wrong with it, but it can be jazzed up and/or made to be a little more intuitive."
"I would like an automated installation/configuration despite the fact that their service is very collaborative, a customer should be able to deploy the solution by themselves."
"Feature-wise we are only waiting for the release of a "planned disaster" feature that would allow us to patch a hypervisor node without having to take the full storage offline."
"It is not very clear within the StarWind Management Console or the StarWind support documentation how to perform maintenance on a single node in a two-node HA cluster."
"Some configuration options still demand service restarting."
"This solution should be more self-sufficient, running without creating domains or failover clusters."
"An update caused a syncing issue and it took over a month to resolve it"
"The licensing policy needs to be improved. They have a licensing policy based on the number of CPU sockets. Nowadays what has happened is that the license they are trying to move is based on the number of CPU cores. With the advancement in technology there are now more cores in a single CPU. It's been very challenging in terms of managing the license around everything. Today we have a processor with 24 and 32 cores on the same physical CPU."
"This product is not so stable. Maybe it is just not mature enough in its development."
"It is not user-friendly, and it is very difficult to operate. You have to have a deep understanding of the technical details of the infrastructure to implement it. When you compare it with VMware, it is totally different because the graphical user interface is not that easy to understand. It is not intuitive. To use it, you have to read a lot of documentation and even understand what is going on behind the solution. It is not for someone who has a little bit of knowledge. Currently, it is too complex. I need something that is easy to implement. It should have a basic configuration as well as a complex configuration."
"The main issue is the initial investment. It is an expensive product, and it should be cheaper. It should also be easier to use and manage. The professional service for this solution is quite complex and expensive."
"It should be more user-friendly, in my opinion."
"The cloud deployment could be improved."
"The error reporting needs to be improved."
"There are certain aspects of sizing of the solution that need improvement."
"Sangfor does not support a SAS configuration, which is something that we would like."
"Currently, when we need to do capacity planning, we have to rely on Sangfor's support team for assistance. However, if there were dedicated tools available, we could handle it ourselves and increase efficiency."
"Support may be an issue for customers in some industries. For example, financial institutions may require 24/7 support."
"The migration process could be easier."
"The documentation and support from the community are not as good or as mature as VMware or Hyper-V."
"The cost must be improved."
More Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure is ranked 22nd in HCI while Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure is ranked 9th in HCI with 28 reviews. Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure is rated 8.0, while Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure writes "Comes in a small, compact model that does not have any separate management but it is not so stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure writes "The solution offers straightforward setup, scalability, and manageability". Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure is most compared with VMware vSAN, VxRail and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), whereas Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure is most compared with VMware vSAN, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), VxRail, HPE SimpliVity and OpenNebula.
See our list of best HCI vendors.
We monitor all HCI 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.
