Compare FlexPod vs. IBM VersaStack

FlexPod is ranked 1st in Converged Infrastructure with 117 reviews while IBM VersaStack is ranked 10th in Converged Infrastructure with 2 reviews. FlexPod is rated 8.6, while IBM VersaStack is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of FlexPod writes "The agility reduces the number of hours that it takes to construct a physical or virtual data center". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM VersaStack writes "Replication and DR implementation became faster". FlexPod is most compared with Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series, VxRail and Nutanix, whereas IBM VersaStack is most compared with Vblock, FlexPod and Dell PowerEdge VRTX. See our FlexPod vs. IBM VersaStack report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
FlexPod Logo
Read 117 FlexPod reviews.
10,751 views|4,223 comparisons
IBM VersaStack Logo
903 views|635 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about FlexPod vs. IBM VersaStack and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
378,124 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
The most valuable feature of this solution is the stability.The most valuable feature of this solution is the automation point because it's a lot less staff to have to manage it.The most valuable features of this solution are the integration and ease of use.The guides that we use to install FlexPods are always up-to-date. This is really helpful, especially if there is a new product with NetApp moving so far forward and Cisco as well. For them to join together and update a centralized document for the install process, it is really good. It helps us understand if there are features from the first version that we installed while upgrading that we need to implement. Those are in the document. So, we find that document useful and helpful when moving forward.The solution’s unified support for the entire stack is critically important because we cannot afford downtime.We have significantly less latency now with our imagery.The solution’s validated designs for major enterprise apps in our organization are very important. It's basically become critical to our organization to have that system functioning a 100 percent of the time. If that system is not functional, then our doctors and nurses can't provide the care to the patients in an effective way. So, it's important that it is stable, works, and easy to understand.It runs our VMs. Our SQL databases are all on VMs, so everything is virtualized.

Read more »

Replication and DR implementation became faster.The combination of Cisco's architecture and IBM's flash technology. Cisco provides FI technology which provides one simple architecture. IBM's flash technology is fast.

Read more »

Cons
I would like to see a more centralized support model.We would like to see the automation improved because there has been a learning curve having to create the workflows.This is an expensive solution.It would be nice to have something like an automated, upgrade solution The tasks needed to upgrade the hardware within FlexPod are still quite behind compared to some of its other aspects. That's more on the Cisco side.The majority of the time, if we need more storage, then we need to work with customizing the NetApp deployment. Right now, we just do a generic deployment, then wherever we have a need for storage, we have to move some application out of the next FlexPod deployment. One thing is to customize based on the requirements, but the requirements change so frequently, they are absolutely obsolete in six months.The solution has not reduced our data center costs.There is a history of issues with hardware availability. For example, we'll buy an array or a filer with a particular configuration and particular size of drive, sizing it appropriately. Then, as we grow, they're like, "Oh, you can always get more." Then when you go to get more, that model or type of disk is no longer available. It becomes this big process to try to figure out what we need to get, how it'll work, and how that'll integrate into the system. That could be simpler. They could do a bit more to guarantee the availability of parts. Obviously, not being the largest storage vendor, I know they can't sometimes control what the hardware vendors do. However, a bit more transparency and communication about this would be helpful.We dislike going online with the robot stuff. Many times, it has delayed our reaching out to a real support engineer.

Read more »

Raw data mapping for storage should be a given option.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
The footprint in the data center is quite large, especially when you scale out. Maybe find some hardware in the future, where if a new blade comes out, then Cisco can say, "Look, we'll buy those blades back off you, and we'll give you this blade for X amount of money." A buyback scheme would be good for hardware, and even NetApp as well. Something like a buyback scheme for blades and stuff moving forward would be good, because I know that they're going to put more power into them. E.g., replacing four blades might equal one blade, which would be awesome, but we are still going to have those four blades around. Maybe having something where it will give you this much money for these blades so we can upgrade. That would be perfect.Our licensing costs are about $50,000 per year.The main return on investment would be that instead of having to refresh all of our desktop hardware we have been able to go reimage existing machines and use those as thin clients, then also purchase new thin clients rather than buying actual hardware. It also reduces the overhead of having our technicians deploy those systems and maintain them.The solution has saved our customers' organization in terms of CapEx. E.g., with the cloud availability, it's turned into sort of a hybrid CapEx/OpEx model.It is not cheap, but there is a return on investment in time saved and efficiency.We have a lease for approximately $10,000 USD per month.The annual cost is approximately $100,000 USD.We pay approximately $1,400 USD in total for between five-thousand and ten-thousand ports.

Read more »

Information Not Available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Converged Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
378,124 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
1st
Views
10,751
Comparisons
4,223
Reviews
108
Average Words per Review
586
Avg. Rating
8.6
10th
Views
903
Comparisons
635
Reviews
2
Average Words per Review
142
Avg. Rating
8.0
Top Comparisons
Compared 24% of the time.
Compared 18% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 50% of the time.
Compared 19% of the time.
Learn
FlexPod
IBM
Overview

The FlexPod platform, developed by NetApp and Cisco, is a flexible, converged infrastructure solution that delivers prevalidated storage, networking, and server technologies. It’s designed to increase IT responsiveness to business demands while reducing your overall cost of computing. Think maximum uptime, minimal risk

VersaStack is a converged infrastructure solution of network, compute and storage designed for quick deployment and rapid time to value. The solution includes Cisco UCS integrated infrastructure together with IBM software- defined storage solutions to deliver extraordinary levels of agility and efficiency. VersaStack is backed by Cisco Validated Designs and IBM Redbooks application guides for faster infrastructure delivery as well as workload/ application deployment.

Designed for dynamic organizations that want to accelerate business growth while reducing costs, VersaStack incorporates IBM all-flash as well as hybrid storage technologies into the “single pane of glass” management environment provided by Cisco UCS Director. The solution offers quick deployment and execution of business applications—with the versatility to adapt as business priorities change. Providing an IT infrastructure that is easy, efficient and versatile, VersaStack helps accelerate data center infrastructure deployment and helps efficiently manage information and resources amid business change.

Offer
Learn more about FlexPod
Learn more about IBM VersaStack
Sample Customers
University of Sao Paulo, WD-40, The Commonwell Mutual Insurance GroupNewhall Hospital, Medicat, JJ Haines, Sigmax
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm16%
Comms Service Provider10%
Energy/Utilities Company9%
Healthcare Company9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company19%
Comms Service Provider17%
Financial Services Firm12%
Healthcare Company6%
No Data Available
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business11%
Midsize Enterprise22%
Large Enterprise68%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business14%
Midsize Enterprise35%
Large Enterprise51%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about FlexPod vs. IBM VersaStack and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
378,124 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Converged 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.
Sign Up with Email