We performed a comparison between CloudStack and Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."CloudStack, by default, gives us a zone-based setup which makes it easier to manage datacenters located in different geographical areas."
"I have been impressed by CloudStack's most recent updates around Kubernetes. In particular, they have worked with Kubernetes to support the Cluster API, and you can now easily integrate Kubernetes into CloudStack and get access to a lot of good features."
"Multiple types of hypervisor support, multi-zone support, and VPC are great valuable features."
"CloudStack helped us showcase our features through process visualization and functional solutions."
"You can manage infrastructure with a few people, since product is monolithic. We had three engineers (storage, virtual, Linux admins) only. Also, CS supports different flavours of hypervisors."
"I liked the separation of the isolated network versus the shared network."
"The structuring of the components and isolated environments helped us when using parts of the framework at different levels of product development."
"My company could implement a lot of customizations and integration with load balancers and DNS. When we started using CloudStack, we didn't have that integration, so we developed that. We could fix anything missing in the solution."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the three nodes and the free hypervisor."
"The Continuous Data Protection (CDP) feature is one of the good features."
"Sangfor HCI has a bundle of security features that are easy to monitor on the HCI dashboard."
"The solution provides a single management console."
"The interface is very user-friendly."
"It is flexible like a hyper-convergence system. You can add nodes, and you can scale to have better performance and stability. I also like the backup feature, the recovery system, and the web interface GUI to handle everything."
"The manageability feature is the most important aspect of the solution."
"It would be great to have a couple of “external” networks for VPC and have the possibility, for each domain, to choose they type of “external” network."
"The absence of the feature, deploy an instance from a snapshot, is the weak point of the platform. It is a feature that everyone needs nowadays."
"We did encounter issues with stability, and the main issue was secondary storage. When it is not available, XenServers and hypervisors are affected. And CS doesn’t do anything to reboot, or fix. Come to think of it, maybe it shouldn’t, considering their approach – CS just orchestrates everything else on the hypervisor and storage level."
"The numerous, multi-layered drill-down menus make it difficult to find one simple knob to turn."
"The area of Apache CloudStack that could stand the most improvement is the functionality/features around the virtual routers. They can be somewhat cumbersome to deal with at times and are the least stable piece of the product."
"I would like to see support for native VLAN, and fault-tolerance."
"I think that container technology in CloudStack is an area that needs to be improved."
"The product does not have an easily implementable payment gateway."
"It should have object storage. It already has network virtualization and micro-segmentation, but it is missing object storage. It does not have object storage. vSAN also does not have object storage, but Nutanix has object storage, and it is natively integrated into its HCI. So, if you pay for the object storage license, you have that module pre-built."
"The solution could improve by including backup capabilities."
"There are certain aspects of sizing of the solution that need improvement."
"Sangfor could improve its built-in CAP system. Right now, we need to use an external tool for CAP."
"The error reporting needs to be improved."
"Sangfor does not support a SAS configuration, which is something that we would like."
"The cost must be improved."
"The documentation and support from the community are not as good or as mature as VMware or Hyper-V."
More Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure Pricing and Cost Advice →
CloudStack is ranked 12th in Cloud Management with 29 reviews while Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure is ranked 17th in Cloud Management with 28 reviews. CloudStack is rated 8.0, while Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CloudStack writes "A solution that strikes a balance between user-friendliness, scalability, and stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure writes "The solution offers straightforward setup, scalability, and manageability". CloudStack is most compared with OpenNebula, vCloud Director, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), Cloudify and VMware Aria Automation, whereas Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure is most compared with VMware vSAN, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), VxRail, HPE SimpliVity and Huawei FusionCube Hyper-Converged Infrastructure. See our CloudStack vs. Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure report.
See our list of best Cloud Management vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Management 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.
