We performed a comparison between NetApp HCI [EOL] and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, VMware, Nutanix and others in HCI."The product has improved the ability to mimic physical SAN environments to demo scenarios and troubleshoot problems."
"One of the most valuable features is the way it sets up the virtual SAN, because we don't have to buy a separate appliance for storage. It uses the existing storage on the servers, which is definitely a cost savings for us."
"This was a great implementation for a small to mid-size business."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support. They are excellent and you can learn a lot from the support team."
"This has helped to improve the reliability of service and operation in all departments, without having to stop in case of emergency situations."
"We have experienced multiple hardware failures at one site and the fault-tolerant volume worked exactly as expected with zero downtime."
"The StarWind VSAN is always up and allows us to move VMS to other nodes for maintenance, without interruption to service."
"This software lets us maintain storage redundancy across both of our Hyper-V hosts, so if one goes down the environment fails over to the other and we have minimal to no downtime."
"It has reduced our hypervisor footprint by around 20%."
"We're trying to move to a much more API-driven management of all of our products, and NetApp's product is, from all the SDS providers we have seen, the most fully-baked API out there."
"The ease of deployment is a positive feature that allows us to scale easily."
"The multi-vertical aspect is what is most valuable for us. The main reason we wanted a multi protocol was because Amazon was not able to provide us with access to the same data as we could get from Linux and Windows lengths. That was our value proposition for this solution."
"We like SnapMirror and we've been using it for many years. We also like the object storage tools, as well as cloud sync for customers wanting to integrate between the cloud and local."
"This is a strong product and it works very well, and the processes around it continue to grow and mature."
"The most valuable feature is the software design storage that really provided a faster, agile, easier to scale up and out storage path."
"It's an all-flash solution. NetApp guarantees 3-to-1 or more than 3-to-1. It has guaranteed performance, like 15K IOPS per node."
"It's quite easy to scale, and you have the option to have distributed nodes everywhere around the world that work as one. You can also have a solution for small branch offices with only two nodes for redundancy, and that's good enough to start."
"We like that the size of the box is 1U or 2U only, and all the servers are fit into that box. The ease of operation is there. All the servers and the SAN storage are inside the box."
"There are a lot of features in Nutanix that are different from other hyper-converged solutions, such as site-to-site replication. VM-based site-to-site replication is bundled with the software licensing. For the DR, it has the availability groups, which is one of the key features that Nutanix provides."
"One of the most valuable features is that it can be applied at any scale."
"One of the most valuable features is how well this solution performs. It's stable, aside from some patch issues, but it's great from a virtualization and scalability perspective."
"The most valuable feature is the solution's ease of upgrading."
"It offers very useful data protection."
"To receive a performance enhancement by merely clicking the one button upgrade is the true value of the platform and what I look forward to the most."
"New versions of this solution should be tested more thoroughly before the release as we had a few problems with one version due to a bug."
"We just need more integration with Veeam."
"While we had little to no issues in setting up StarWind and received excellent support from the StarWind technicians, we would have appreciated a clearer guideline for a setup with the free version of StarWind Management Console or, in other words - for the setup with the PowerShell."
"Ongoing improvements in read and write performance would help meet increasingly demanding workloads."
"We have, in rare cases, received conflicting guidance between different support folks within StarWind."
"I am expecting to see it more user-friendly in the future."
"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."
"There needs to be more visibility on how long the cloud replication will take as there is no current ETA."
"I would like for them to fall a little closer to like the VMware release model. The new features and new solutions tend to come from the VMware side. I would like for NetApp to follow along closely with VMware's release schedule."
"The deployment process has room for improvement. I would like for it to be a cookie-cutter deployment."
"There are some legacy applications which still cannot be migrated. That is why we have to keep two environments: legacy and the new one. We would like to see more compatibility to move stuff."
"Because I like block mode, I'd like to see SAN connectivity. I would like to be able to easily put it into my current environment."
"They could improve the packaging."
"There's a limitation with a block in the file. That's where I see that it's not very efficient for upgrades and for management."
"My biggest pain point is the installation part. I would like to see the appliance itself remove the entire switch that goes behind it and figure out how to do all the cluster interconnects within the box itself."
"In the next version I would like to see bigger GPU types and insurance for including transparency."
"Some clients find the solution's cost to be too high."
"The solution doesn't support older systems, which can be a problem for some organizations who wish to implement it. It became a problem for us due to the fact that some of our systems are older."
"The initial setup can be a bit difficult."
"The name of the solutions offered by Nutanix does not indicate what the tool does."
"The scalability of Nutanix Acropolis AOS needs improvement."
"The price could be lower."
"The pricing of the solution is too high. It needs to be adjusted or lowered to be more competitive."
"I would like to see Acropolis add the ability to migrate VMs between storage containers. I don't know if they've added this in the latest versions, but I haven't seen it yet. It's mainly about AHV. When we use VMware, we can move between storage containers. In VMware, it's just like regular storage, and we can move it."
More Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
NetApp HCI [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in HCI with 32 reviews while Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) is ranked 3rd in HCI with 194 reviews. NetApp HCI [EOL] is rated 8.0, while Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of NetApp HCI [EOL] writes "Ease of provisioning has allowed us to implement large installations in a very short time frame". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) writes "A powerful solution with easy deployment, upgrades, and management". NetApp HCI [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) is most compared with VMware vSAN, VxRail, HPE SimpliVity, VMware vSphere and Dell PowerFlex.
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.
NetApp is all flash based on SolidFire Storage . support only VMware
but Nutanix can work with VMware , Hyper-V, Nutanix AHV . Also it can be Hybrid Or All Flash.
If your prime consideration is initial cost then Nutanix with it's ability to provide a non-Flash solution is going to be the answer.
The NetApp HCI solution with separate compute and storage nodes enables scaling in either resource type without needing to include the other. This could reduce TCO over a period of time as requirements change. As the storage is non-virtualised more CPU resources are made available to service user workloads. Native connectivity to hyperscalers and design guides for Private Cloud and an expanding hypervisor landscape.
Ahmed Gomaa, I am sorry, but this is plain wrong.
NetApp HCI supports not only VMware, HyperV, and KVM but has also the unique ability to connect physical hosts without performance penalty or license overhead.
The biggest difference in terms of architecture is that Nutanix needs a Controler Virtual Machine on every host, beeing a legacy HCI architecture. NetApp HCI is references as "disaggregated HCI" as compute nodes serve only compute and storage nodes serve only storage. This allows us to scale compute and storage independently, so no HCI tax wasted.
THE biggest difference in terms of performance is that IOPs are guaranteed in the storage subsystem of NetApp HCI. This is a game-changer for a datacenter as it enables private cloud admins to guarantee SLAs - not just bet on them.
For small environments without the need for VMware Nutanix may be a good choice. But data locality (data needs to reside on the hosts it is read from (kills this solution in my perspective for larger deployments). Even with a prism - making the administration of multiple Nutanix clusters nice and shiny - there are still several clusters in place. With NetApp, HCI there is no need for this. You can consolidate workloads on a massive scale.
The biggest difference in terms of hybrid multi-cloud is that NetApp HCI can speak natively with ONTAP systems via SnapMirror and it integrates directly into all hyperscalers. Ultimately the management of containers can be done within one pane of glass - regardless of where the containers live - OnPrem on HCI, GCS, AWS, Azure.
For me the HCI market is like the automotive market 60 years ago: Germans invented the car, but US-made is cool. Nutanix "invented" HCI, but NetApp wtook it that one step further.
NetApp are enables to NetApp's customers (Already customers) to reuse their legacy hardware while moving the legacy hardware to DR and using SnapMirror techonology for replication while they will use at Primary site using NetApp HCI . It's reducing to need to buy solution for two sites
In the other hand , Nutanix have solutions based Hybrid, those are reduce costs , not every customer is need an All flash solution.
Also , in Nutanix the customer can choose with which hypervisor the would like to run their environment (AHV , VMWARE KVM , Hyper-V etc..)
Wihout any doubt go for nutanix HCI
My only difference is that Nutanix was still developing features with their software BUT what was there fir what we were accessing was very good. I cannot comment on cost as everyone uses their own vendor pools. You need to test both interfaces in your environment or in the vendors test environment and determine if the solution overall will fit your Architecture and Growth plans.
Don't forget the learning curve to adapt and the ongoing maintenance costs. Finally Support... call into the support line and see if their response or professionalism with will for you.
Nothing worse than calling for support and it the company has 9-5 offering lol.
it depends on your needs
NetApp Is Very Good , but expensive as it's All Flash , based on SolidFire Storage . It will support only VMware
but Nutanix can be ALL Flash or Hybrid , also can work with Hyper-v , VMware or Nutanix AHV