Compare Chef vs. SaltStack

Chef is ranked 4th in Configuration Management with 13 reviews while SaltStack which is ranked 5th in Configuration Management with 1 review. Chef is rated 8.4, while SaltStack is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Chef writes "It never uses any type of human-readable interface. Therefore, you don't have to go into a GUI nor use a command line tool". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SaltStack writes "Gave us automation tools that allowed us to standardize our environment". Chef is most compared with SCCM, Ansible and BigFix, whereas SaltStack is most compared with Ansible, Chef and SCCM.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Chef Logo
Read 13 Chef reviews.
5,866 views|3,123 comparisons
SaltStack Logo
12,518 views|4,494 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Microsoft, Red Hat and others in Configuration Management. Updated: July 2019.
354,290 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
You set it and forget it. You don't have to worry about the reliability or the deviations from any of the other configurations.It streamlined our deployments and system configurations across the board rather than have us use multiple configurations or tools, basically a one stop shop.The scalability of the product is quite nice.The most valuable feature is the language that it uses: Ruby.This solution has improved my organization in the way that deployment has become very quick and orchestration is easy. If we have thousands of servers we can easily deploy in a small amount of time. We can deploy the applications or any kind of announcements in much less time.The most important thing is it can handle a 100,000 servers at the same time easily with no time constraints.Deployment has become quick and orchestration is now easy.It has been very easy to tie it into our build and deploy automation for production release work, etc. All the Chef pieces more or less run themselves.

Read more »

The ability to programmatically describe the desired state of a single, or an entire fleet of servers, on-premises, and in a cloud environment.

Read more »

Cons
I would like them to add database specific items, configuration items, and migration tools. Not necessarily on the builder side or the actual setup of the system, but more of a migration package for your different database sets, such as MongoDB, your extenders, etc. I want to see how that would function with a transition out to AWS for Aurora services and any of the RDBMS packages.The agent on the server sometimes acts finicky.I would like to see more security features for Chef and more automation.I would rate this solution a nine because our use case and whatever we need is there. Ten out of ten is perfect. We have to go to IOD and stuff so they should consider things like this to make it a ten.Since we are heading to IoT, this product should consider anything related to this.There is a slight barrier to entry if you are used to using Ansible, since it is Ruby-based.If they can improve their software to support Docker containers, it would be for the best.Third-party innovations need improvement, and I would like to see more integration with other platforms.

Read more »

A hardened set of tests would be much appreciated.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
I wasn't involved in the purchasing, but I am pretty sure that we are happy with the current pricing and licensing since it never comes up.We are using the free, open source version of the software, which we are happy with at this time.Purchasing the solution from AWS Marketplace was a good experience. AWS's pricing is pretty in line with the product's regular pricing. Though instance-wise, AWS is not the cheapest in the market.We are able to save in development time, deployment time, and it makes it easier to manage the environments.The price is always a problem. It is high. There is room for improvement. I do like purchasing on the AWS Marketplace, but I would like the ability to negotiate and have some flexibility in the pricing on it.When we're rolling out a new server, we're not using the AWS Marketplace AMI, we're using our own AMI, but we are paying them a licensing fee.The price per node is a little weird. It doesn't scale along with your organization. If you're truly utilizing Chef to its fullest, then the number of nodes which are being utilized in any particular day might scale or change based on your Auto Scaling groups. How do you keep track of that or audit it? Then, how do you appropriately license it? It's difficult.

Read more »

Information Not Available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Configuration Management solutions are best for your needs.
354,290 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
4th
Views
5,866
Comparisons
3,123
Reviews
13
Average Words per Review
601
Avg. Rating
8.5
5th
Views
12,518
Comparisons
4,494
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
542
Avg. Rating
9.0
Top Comparisons
Compared 29% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 38% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Learn
Chef
SaltStack
Video Not Available
Overview
Chef is a powerful automation platform that transforms infrastructure into code. Whether you’re operating in the cloud, on-premises, or in a hybrid environment, Chef automates how infrastructure is configured, deployed, and managed across your network, no matter its size.SaltStack platform or Salt is a Python-based open source configuration management software and remote execution engine, supporting the "Infrastructure as Code" approach to deployment and cloud management.
Offer
Learn more about Chef
Learn more about SaltStack
Sample Customers
Facebook, Standard Bank, GE Capital, Nordstrom, Target, IGN, Yahoo, Etsy, Riot Games, Bloomberg, BonobosPhotobucket
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Microsoft, Red Hat and others in Configuration Management. Updated: July 2019.
354,290 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Configuration 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.
Sign Up with Email