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, Nutanix, VMware and others in HCI."StarWind Virtual SAN offers high availability and data resilience features to prevent data loss if hardware fails."
"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."
"The support has been amazing and quick to reply."
"It integrates (fully) with VMware and Veeam, my hypervisor, and backup vendors, so for me, all the puzzle pieces simply fit and work smoothly."
"User friendly interface and straight forward implementation."
"The most useful aspect is the hyper-converged SD SAN and the ease to expand it by just adding cheap SSD or NVME disks."
"Before VSAN, hypervisor configuration changes and updates resulted in VM outages. Now, downtime is dramatically reduced."
"StarWind allowed us to deploy highly available shared storage within our budget."
"The solution integrates well with all the other applications that we use on our environment."
"The most valuables features of it are the deduplication and the compaction because the ratios are much better than what we normally get on our FAS storage."
"HCI definitely improved how flexible we scale, and our entrance into the cloud. The features are very rich, in terms of both avenues. It's helped us flexibly move and shift our workloads around, back and forth."
"It allows me to move a VM set and require extra performance. I can easily move them onto it and have it just run."
"Scalability was another thing I was looking at. The solution, by its very nature, is designed to be expandable and flexible, so you don't have to buy performance you don't need today, but you're also not stuck with something you can't expand."
"The solution is very scalable."
"The NetApp Deployment Engine that comes with it makes the actual deployment and usage very easy. That's our primary focus and it's hyper-converged. That's something that we want to use as well."
"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."
"What I like the most are the high-availability and scalability."
"Acropolis has a great interface and lots of management features packaged with it at an affordable price."
"In terms of scalability, adding a number of nodes, I find that it will not be any issues."
"The pricing is pretty good."
"The scalability is great."
"Most beneficial feature is simplicity, ease of use."
"In addition to the hyper-converged infrastructure, most of our clients are pleased with Acropolis' built-in replication in terms of the DR setup. Our clients also like Prism Central's advanced management and analytics, and many find Nutanix Flow and playbooks incredibly useful."
"It's easy to use and has a very smooth onboarding process."
"Perhaps more reporting features on the utilization, usage, and performance of the configured high-availability images and underlying physical disks would be helpful."
"There needs to be more visibility on how long the cloud replication will take as there is no current ETA."
"It would be good to have a little more access to control certain aspects within the UI."
"StarWind really needs to market its product more."
"They need to improve the speed of the interfaces, thus allowing for better traffic on the network."
"Some of the documentation seems to be a bit older and refers to deprecated items."
"Android app for monitoring and receiving push notifications as alarms or monitoring I/O from any mobile device could be a good feature and nice to have as we are not always on our desk."
"I had to buy upgraded support, which was not a problem, but it wasn't a prorated amount, so I paid for the support, the full upgrade, but I only got a couple of months out of it because it was only good until renewal time."
"I'd like to see some additional graphics capabilities because I'd like to look at some virtual desktop integration for CAD software."
"To improve the product, they should make it more flexible."
"In the next version I would like to see bigger GPU types and insurance for including transparency."
"It would be nice to have better access to tutorials and a test environment for simulations."
"The networking needs improvement."
"I would like to have the ability to replicate to multiple sites."
"I would like to see the implementation process improved."
"There have been some drive type of issues where we have to apply a new code level. Storage nodes kick certain drives until they act as though they have failed when really they haven't. You just have to reinsert them, then they go on about their happy way. It's sort of a bug."
"Some clients find the solution's cost to be too high."
"In terms of the IT different categories, I would like for the governing sections to be able to use it in the IT department. If they can have something like a one view management portal or software similar to VMware that would be an added value."
"The ability to create clusters faster would be nice to see in a future release."
"Nutanix could streamline Acropolis' advanced management to keep pace with its competitors. For example, in VMware vSphere ESXi Hypervisor, you can directly put a host into maintenance mode via the GUI. However, it takes several steps to do this with Nutanix Acropolis, and you need to use the command-line interface for most of the steps."
"As of now, Acropolis and VMware cannot talk to each other. Until we have some kind of interface, it would be much better for Nutanix if they built an interface which can talk. Otherwise, if I have a VMware stack and I already have a Nutanix stack, I create containers, I create clusters on VMware, I create clusters on Nutanix. All of these clusters cannot talk to each other. Then it has to be then subverted as a parallel execution. What happens then is that I have to work in two different environments within my data center. Practically, they are two different data centers but physically and logically, they are one. If they cannot talk to each other that creates a lot of issues. That is something which Nutanix has to develop because for Nutanix it is very simple. For example, Oracle is using a function called GoldenGate. They have a feature called GoldenGate which allows them to talk to various different environments which must really help."
"The reporting feature isn't very good."
"While the customer support is truly incredible, for Spanish speakers it would be appropriate to have support in their native language to further improve problem-solving conditions."
"One of the very important things that I would like to see in Nutanix, but I'm not sure if it's in the roadmap or not, is to have some kind of caching optimization at remote sites, to build active-active data centers more easily."
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 2nd 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 Hyper-V.
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