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."Their support goes above and beyond with the integration of their software."
"It has a nice, simple control panel. You can clearly see the state and health of storage along with the synchronization."
"StarWind Virtual SAN is a very easy-to-use solution that can be quickly and easily deployed and configured without intimate and specific knowledge in the virtualization sphere."
"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."
"It provided the much-needed HA on an extremely low budget."
"This was a great implementation for a small to mid-size business."
"The license price is one of the cheapest in the market."
"It's quite easy to install."
"It is easy to administrate the solution, and the company handles its technical support well."
"It has automated a lot of workloads. It has automated us from ticketing a large number to a very small number."
"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 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."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the software design storage that really provided a faster, agile, easier to scale up and out storage path."
"The solution is very scalable."
"The most valuable feature I have found to be the Acropolis Hypervisor (AHV)."
"The cloud features in-site offering, which I found to be very interesting."
"It supports multi-cloud integration that includes AWS, Google, and Azure."
"Acropolis AOS is scalable to nodes and the cloud."
"You need to send commands through the command-line interface(CLI). This could be improved. The commands are done better in VMware."
"Nutanix Acropolis AOS is easy to use, it is a great platform."
"The HCI environment itself is very intuitive. Everything is centralized under one solution. And, they also have fast server built in in addition to a network analyzer."
"The initial setup was quite straightforward."
"The only point they should improve is the amount of documentation available for the user, especially in the first preliminary phase in which we were testing the product on our own."
"The documentation is good. However, if compared with competitors, it could be enhanced and made more professional."
"It should be improved in the way it detects the right filesystem image after a complete shutdown of the system or in the case of disaster recovery."
"The initial setup got a little confusing at a few points with differences between the VMware version in documentation vs the latest, etc."
"It would be nice if we could designate pools, or tiers, for storage of different speeds, and then assign rules to new VMs that would automatically place them into the proper pool."
"It is difficult to control all of the hardware components."
"In the next release, they could make some graphs of the real-time loading, speed of storage, and interfaces. Of course, these can be viewed in other places. But, in the event of a malfunction or troubleshooting, this would be convenient."
"I want to suggest that the complexity of the startup and shutdown procedure needs to be reduced."
"If you want to have a really dense data center then it's hard to have a big chunk of cabling going through everything."
"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 vCenter keeps crashing, meaning that there is no stability in our environment."
"At the moment, I am not looking for new features. Quality of Service (QoS) and capacity efficiency are the two things that I want to resolve in my customer's environment. QoS improves the performance of each tenancy, and with capacity efficiency, the customer can achieve more capacity as compared to the normal capacity."
"Its stability is very bad. It has been crashing continuously. In one year, we got three crashes, which is unbelievable for an appliance that is guaranteed for 10 years without any crash."
"The networking needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
"This solution would be improved with built-in integration with Rubrik."
"NCI's pricing is expensive."
"If we can have certified compatibility with other companies, such as Oracle, then it would let us know that they function correctly together."
"With some projects that we are deploying, there are errors that arise when adding nodes."
"AHV is a great hypervisor but still limited compared to VMware. AHV is the one product they must improve."
"The software-defined networking should be improved. It is quite substandard as compared to the VMware variant. The software-defined networking is quite limited, and we usually use other products to do that. We're aware that Nutanix is working on that and will be coming out with better solutions, and we can't wait because to do a fully software-defined architecture, the abstraction layer needs not only software-defined storage, which you have, but also the software-defined networking piece."
"We had a few problems with the foundation machine that you can use to build your systems out. We've got it working now, but it should be improved."
"I'm sure there are a lot of things that could be improved, but I'm actually very satisfied with this product. There may be some possibilities to move the virtual server dismounting points or to move the server from one group to another, but I can't think of any special improvements or update features."
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