Compare NetApp HCI vs. Nutanix

NetApp HCI is ranked 8th in Hyper-Converged (HCI) with 28 reviews while Nutanix is ranked 2nd in Hyper-Converged (HCI) with 15 reviews. NetApp HCI is rated 8.0, while Nutanix is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of NetApp HCI writes "A strong and efficient product that can scale storage and compute independently". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nutanix writes "What you might not know about Nutanix that makes it so unique". NetApp HCI is most compared with Nutanix, VMware vSAN and VxRail, whereas Nutanix is most compared with VMware vSAN, VxRail and HPE SimpliVity. See our NetApp HCI vs. Nutanix report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series Logo
27,522 views|20,869 comparisons
NetApp HCI Logo
10,771 views|7,967 comparisons
Nutanix Logo
123,535 views|89,512 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Zeray Assefa
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp HCI vs. Nutanix and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
382,547 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 was the backup - it was easy to back up. It was also very easy to administrate and manage the system; much easier and faster. Finally, it was easy to extend the disk capacities.The integration between the storage and the server applications is the most valuable feature of this solution. It cuts down on the necessity to buy a secondary storage system.. It saves money in the long-run.The most valuable feature of Cisco HyperFlex HX is that it is self-contained.Cisco HyperFlex HX has improved the way our organization functions in the way that the time to deliver a VM takes me five minutes. In comparison, my cloud team's response is a couple of days based on all their overhead policies, procedures, and ticket requests. This is substantial.The most valuable features of this solution are the connectivity, consistency, and that we now have fewer vulnerabilities on the network.The most valuable features of this solution are scalability, performance, and reliability. It scales well inside of a large data center.The most valuable feature for our company is that it works internally. We have a lot of internal projects for optimization.The most valuable feature is that it is something small that can be more easily deployed than a full data center set of servers.

Read more »

The most valuable feature, currently, is the density of the system as hardware. I'm able to leverage the density of the product and remove bigger hardware which requires more space, cooling, and power costs, obviously. There are cost savings, obviously.It is easy to administrate the solution, and the company handles its technical support well.It is a unique product with simplified setup and independent control over storage and compute.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.The most valuable feature is the software design storage that really provided a faster, agile, easier to scale up and out storage path.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.The ease of deployment is a positive feature that allows us to scale easily.The most valuable aspects are that it's an all-in-one solution and it's very self-contained.

Read more »

Nutanix has several unique capabilities to ensure linear scalability.The fact that there is only one interface to deploy a complete solution for maximum storage is fantastic.Best features are around data locality, compression, and deduplication.The most valuable feature would be the ease of deployment. That is the most significant feature for me because I've worked with multiple vendors and it's always been very complicated to install the software and get everything running.It is a good solution and it is easy to work on their platform.It has solid performance and provides data locality.The level of statistical performance data that it can confirm in real-time is extremely useful. I can see what my VM’s hosts and guests are doing from a single pane of glass and identify issues before they would otherwise become apparent.SRM capabilities for replication have been proven reliable and very useful for our organization.

Read more »

Cons
I would have liked it to be able to back up the system to a cloud, to be able to work from any other placeWe would like to have the ability to not have to reboot while doing updates. Being able to work through updates with as minimal amount of impact to users.The initial setup of the Cisco HyperFlex HX platform was medium-level difficult. It's a little bit different from traditional servers. It takes getting used to the learning curve.Cisco's technical support originally was outstanding, but it has declined over the last 12 months. I've heard they're trying to do better, but I haven't been overly impressed with their support recently for HyperFlex.The additional feature I would like to see included in the next release of this solution is more security. We want to add more data servers to all the hosts all over the world. We have 140 hosts that connect to one data center in Manila.The scalability could use improvement.The deployment could be made a little bit easier, as we still seem to struggle with it a little bit for a day or so to get it running.We would like to see better integration in the next release of this solution.

Read more »

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.The product needs better support for installing the operating system on the machine.It is easy to install now, but could potentially be even simpler.The fact that it doesn't have all the data points we need and all the historical data that I would like. I find that a lot of the performance analysis is done through support, where they have something that we don't have. It would be nice just to have all that on-prem.The problem is that it needs to be much more stable, for example, when I want to do the upgrade to 1.7 that just released, I also need to issue a ticket to the support guy in India and he asked me to deploy another mlock. There are a lot of manual steps compared with other products.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.It would be nice to have better access to tutorials and a test environment for simulations.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.

Read more »

There is a need is to be able to consume Nutanix storage from outside the cluster for other, non-Nutanix workloads.They have offered some new features that I have not deployed so I assume that these issues might have been addressed already, but, at my time there was a networking problem.We could always use a performance upgrade, or simplified management.If they can simplify the software slightly for the installation, that would make all the difference.If we can have certified compatibility with other companies, such as Oracle, then it would let us know that they function correctly together.I would like to see a fuller integration with the public cloud. It would help the user enter the hybrid cloud infrastructure.Regarding third-party backup solutions, the only agentless option is Commvault, which is expensive, complex, and requires intensive vendor training.We would like to see it support other systems outside of the compute stack from which it was built.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
It's much more expensive than rack servers. It was an issue, but when you compare it to the number of people who were administrative assistants before, it's on the positive ROI side. It's much cheaper.We currently have a perpetual license, which is kind of unlimited, so we don't have the normal licensing cost, yet.Our licensing costs are large, but it is combined between all of the Cisco products that we have.One of the challenges we have with HyperFlex is that they have a subscription fee for the operating system that runs on it, and if I remember correctly, it costs approximately $15,000 USD per month.It is relatively expensive, but it can easily return value by freeing up other resources.It's roughly $30,000 per Hyperflex license, so that would be about $60,000 a year.Our licensing is Hybrid. We have all of our applications for billing and outage management through this.They are not the cheapest on the market. But there's an old saying I like to quote: "If you know that you are getting what you pay for, it's fine if it's expensive."

Read more »

The licensing fees are renewed annually.This solution reduced our maintenance costs. We were going to have to pay one to two million dollars to put in compute nodes. We are avoiding those costs.You still have to pay for the licensing for VMware and Red Hat licenses separately. It's not all inclusive at this point.All the licenses are included when you buy the program.Licenses run on a yearly basis, and there aren't any additional fees other than the standard licensing fee.There are the overall infrastructure costs. Even though the initial costing was higher, we calculated for year-to-year for five years. That brought us into a position where we decided, we have to go for HCI rather than having distributor systems.This solution saved our organization time (35 percent) and money. We have a hefty group of developers, and if you multiply that by 30 to 35 percent, that is quite a bit of money.Where we lost nearly 75 percent of our infrastructure due to a malicious attack and were able to recover two and a half hours into it due to the integration, it saved us and all of our customers. Because we were able to recover so fast from the attack, the solution paid for itself right there.

Read more »

Pricing varies greatly between license and editions.They should lower the price. If they did they would fall into a more competitive market because the price does scare a lot of potential customers away when they get the quote.There are a lot of features included with Nutanix that cost a lot with other companies.I don't feel that I am receiving the performance which I am paying for.Work close with your InfraTeam and discuss with Nutanix the best way to achieve sizing and price that are right for you.Licensing depends on the features needed.Extra features should not be so expensive. We would love to be able to use or even just try some of the extra features without having to buy them. Buying those features is just as expensive as buying vSphere licenses, so the cost savings is nullified.Setup cost is minor, pricing is quite a bit (we have a 7-node-cluster for about 450K EUR with 2 vGPU-nodes for Citrix) but that includes hardware, software, and support.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Hyper-Converged (HCI) solutions are best for your needs.
382,547 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Answers from the Community
Miriam Tover
author avatarJames Tate
Consultant

The biggest difference is the ability to scale compute and storage independently. NetApp can scale up the storage without the need for extra CPU (and hence VMware licenses for ESX). Nutanix does have a storage node, but it has limitations. Another key difference is the NetApp uses an inbuilt method for the central storage plane and doesn't use VSAN which saves on licensing. Cost wise, Nutanix is almost always more expensive than alternative solutions.

author avatarAhmed Gomaa
Reseller

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.

author avatarArchiSolut677
Reseller

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.

author avatarDominik Oppitz
Real User

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.

author avatarSystem Engineer with 201-500 employees
Reseller

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..)

author avatarAshish-Aggarwal
User

Wihout any doubt go for nutanix HCI

author avatarTerry Chapman
User

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.

author avatarAhmed Gomaa
Reseller

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

Top Comparisons
Compared 35% of the time.
Compared 33% of the time.
Compared 39% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 18% of the time.
Compared 30% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
Learn
Cisco
NetApp
Nutanix
Overview

The Cisco HyperFlex HX Data Platform is a purpose-built, high-performance, scale-out file system with a wide array of enterprise-class data management services. The data platform’s innovations redefine distributed storage technology, giving you complete hyper-convergence with enterprise storage features:

  • Enterprise-class data management
  • Continuous data optimization
  • Securely encrypted storage
  • Dynamic data placement
  • Clusterwide parallel data distribution
  • Linear and incremental scaling
  • API-based data platform architecture
  • A simplified approach

NetApp HCI is the only true enterprise-scale hyper converged cloud infrastructure. NetApp HCI comes in a 2 RU chassis with 4 node expansion slots.

Nutanix delivers invisible infrastructure for next-generation enterprise computing, elevating IT to focus on the applications and services that power their business. Nutanix’s software-driven Xtreme Computing Platform natively converges compute, virtualization and storage into a single solution to drive simplicity in the datacenter. Using Nutanix, customers benefit from predictable performance, linear scalability and cloud-like infrastructure consumption.

For more information visit: www.nutanix.com

Offer
Learn more about Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series
Learn more about NetApp HCI
Learn more about Nutanix
Sample Customers
BluePearl Veterinary Partners, Ready Pac Foods, Bryant University, Bellevue Group, KPIT Technologies, City HarvestAmerican Showa, Children's Mercy, Coca-Cola, Consultel Cloud, Evangelische Landeskirche in Wurttemberg, Imperva, Surface Mount Technology St. Lukes Health System, the City of Seattle, Yahoo! Japan, Sligro, Empire Life, Hyundai AUS, and many others.
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Manufacturing Company18%
Comms Service Provider12%
Energy/Utilities Company12%
Healthcare Company9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company36%
Comms Service Provider12%
Retailer7%
Manufacturing Company6%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm14%
Pharma/Biotech Company14%
Manufacturing Company14%
Insurance Company14%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company43%
Manufacturing Company12%
Comms Service Provider8%
Government4%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm15%
Energy/Utilities Company15%
Healthcare Company11%
Manufacturing Company7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company26%
Comms Service Provider13%
Manufacturing Company8%
Financial Services Firm8%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business14%
Midsize Enterprise11%
Large Enterprise75%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business4%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise76%
REVIEWERS
Small Business21%
Midsize Enterprise28%
Large Enterprise52%
REVIEWERS
Small Business37%
Midsize Enterprise33%
Large Enterprise30%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business14%
Midsize Enterprise31%
Large Enterprise55%
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp HCI vs. Nutanix and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
382,547 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Hyper-Converged (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.
Sign Up with Email