IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series is #8 ranked solution in HCI Software. PeerSpot users give Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series an average rating of 8 out of 10. Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series is most commonly compared to VxRail: Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series vs VxRail. Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 56% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a comms service provider, accounting for 35% of all views.
What is Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series?

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
Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series Buyer's Guide

Download the Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: May 2022

Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series Customers

BluePearl Veterinary Partners, Ready Pac Foods, Bryant University, Bellevue Group, KPIT Technologies, City Harvest

Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series Video

Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series pricing:
  • "The licensing is perpetual and the only thing that you may need to pay for on a monthly basis is if you're going to use their cloud-based management features."
  • "Its price is high. Cisco needs to work on the pricing model for this product. Nutanix or VMware are cheaper products, and they provide almost the same functionality. Its price is a big road blocker when we are working with an end customer, and Nutanix and VMware are in competition. If they can reduce its price, it is actually a better choice for customers."
  • Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series Reviews

    Filter by:
    Filter Reviews
    Industry
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Company Size
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Job Level
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Rating
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Considered
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Order by:
    Loading...
    • Date
    • Highest Rating
    • Lowest Rating
    • Review Length
    Search:
    Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
    Aws Al-Dabbagh - PeerSpot reviewer
    IT Manager at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    An all-in-one option that is stable and offers good management
    Pros and Cons
    • "The scalability of the product is quite good overall - as long as you plan correctly from the outset."
    • "Unlike other options, you need to pay a subscription to Cisco yearly instead of paying for the hardware outright, which makes it more expensive in the long run."

    What is our primary use case?

    HyperFlex is a hyper-converged infrastructure system that is a cluster of servers that provide compute and storage at the same time. Most other networking systems provide either computation separately from storage and networking. However, HyperFlex is a combined system that provides compute, networking, and storage in the same solution. That is, it gives you a single point of management for everything instead of separately for different components.

    How has it helped my organization?

    We've adopted Hyperflex as the new Virtualization solution for our network. all new workloads will be created on Hyperflex, and all existing workloads will be migrated to Hyperflex over the next few years.

    What is most valuable?

    The product makes management much easier since there's a single pane of glass to use to monitor, manage and upgrade the system.  You can achieve similar performance for your system by buying separate components, however, HyperFlex allows you to achieve the same performance using one system. It's basically one integrated system. That's the most powerful aspect of it.  The solution is quite stable. The scalability of the product is quite good overall - as long as you plan correctly from the outset.

    What needs improvement?

    A disadvantage is the higher costs involved in using this product. If it were more affordable, it would be easier to recommend and HCI adoption rate would increase. Unlike other options, you need to pay a subscription to Cisco yearly instead of paying for the hardware outright, which makes it more expensive in the long run. The initial setup could be easier. Right now, it's a bit difficult. 
    Buyer's Guide
    Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series
    May 2022
    Learn what your peers think about Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: May 2022.
    598,116 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We've used the solution over the last 12 months.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It's been stable since we set it up. It's been very stable and providing good service. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We are considering expansion at the moment. The solution is easily scalable if it is planned correctly from the beginning.  Our previous generation is going to end support in two years. We're planning to migrate our whole virtualization infrastructure from the old generation solution to the Cisco solution. Basically, within one or two years, we'll be moving all our instrumentation and all our workloads will be moving to this solution. A minimum of three servers is needed. If these servers have good specifications from the beginning, it's as easy as adding another node. You can expand the solution with more and more nodes. That said, if the node isn't configured properly in the amount of CPU, RAM, and storage, then when you try to expand, you must either expand with more than one node to add more and more scalability, or you must upgrade the existing nodes. HyperFlex is hosting our financial systems. In terms of users, for management, it's just the ITT and we're managing the solution. However, if you consider people who are using the servers as infrastructure, then you can say more than 50 people technically are on the solution. Basically, the whole company uses the PBX system as an exchange for phone calls, for example.

    How are customer service and support?

    We haven't reached out to Cisco in terms of needing technical support. We've reached out for other reasons, however,  and they were very quick to respond. For this solution, in particular, we've been working with Cisco's partners  - and since our partner provides good support, then we haven't needed to reach out to Cisco directly.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We used to have a non-converged solution before Hyperflex that had separate components, however, when we chose to go with a hyper-converged solution for our network, we chose HyperFlex.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is not exactly straightforward or simple. It's a bit difficult, a bit complex.  Luckily, we had the support of the Cisco partner to install and integrate the solution. However, it would have been much easier if we could do it in a shorter time.  It is a complicated process for integration and it takes time. It can take several hours to install and configure the solution. If the setup process was faster, it could have been done in a shorter time. Basically, it took about two or three days to finish the whole setup. From unpacking to going online, it took us a few days. While the installation is a part of the process, the most time-consuming point was the initial setup.

    What about the implementation team?

    We had a Cisco partner that assisted us in the initial implementation. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The solution comes at a higher cost than if you had separate integrations grouped together. There are licenses included with the hardware, and then there are annual subscriptions that you need to pay. You need to pay an annual subscription service to Cisco for operating the solution. There are other solutions that are purely hardware and whatever licenses you pay, you pay one time along with the purchase, or if you need to expand. This solution has an annual subscription payment.

    What other advice do I have?

    We are customers and end-users. The HyperFlex is on-premise the hardware infrastructure. You can set it up with VMware ESXi or with Microsoft Hyper-V. We chose to go with VMware ESXi. It was a requirement of the other systems that we depended on. We could have gone with Hyper-V, however, VMware turned out to be the right solution. The system is hardware and it's compatible with both software solutions or hypervisor solutions. We chose VMware ESXi and turned out to be a better solution than Hyper-V. I would recommend the product to other users, as long as it's affordable for the company. The cost is high. It is about 150% more costly than a comparable older generation solution. However, if you can afford it, then by all means go for it.  I'd also advise new users to choose a higher-end specification for the servers. This is also important. That would make extending it easier. For example, the fiber interconnected component the solution sells is like a switch. It's sold per port. If you buy exactly what you need now, you have to replace the hardware when you want to expand. Therefore, plan for the needs of the future, not the present. Overall, I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Datacenter Team Leader at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Achieve the highest level of availability across data centers
    Pros and Cons
    • "We are providing this solution for the customer or converting the customer from a traditional environment to a hyper-converged environment which consolidates all management and support on a single port. This is the main benefit of using the hyper-converged versus the traditional."
    • "Cisco HyperFlex should decrease the amount of memory needed from the Controller VM that controls the physical discs. They control the discs by using the virtual VM over every ESXi host and the VM consumes memory and consumes more hardware resources. They have to improve that by decreasing the amount of required memory and CPUs to control this disc on the server."

    What is our primary use case?

    Our primary use case is for stretched cluster uses when the customer has multiple data centers and he won't achieve the highest level of availability. He can stretch the workload between different data centers giving him more availability when one of these data centers fails and the workload can be migrated and replicated to the other data centers. From an infrastructure level you achieve the highest availability. I am talking about 100% availability from a storage perspective.

    What is most valuable?

    We are providing this solution for the customer or converting the customer from a traditional environment to a hyper-converged environment which consolidates all management and support on a single port. This is the main benefit of using the hyper-converged versus the traditional.

    The stretching cluster features have the highest delivery of availability from a  storage perspective. You gain all the features related to or coming from virtualization because it is based on a virtualized environment. We already implemented VMware over hyper-convergence. We took all the features coming from the virtualized or VMware environment, such as high availability, DRS and sanity rules and we can segregate the workload between two data centers using rules to maintain the workload even if one of data centers fails.

    What needs improvement?

    In terms of what could be improved, Cisco HyperFlex should decrease the amount of memory needed from the Controller VM that controls the physical discs. They control the discs by using the virtual VM over every ESXi host and the VM consumes memory and consumes more hardware resources. They have to improve that by decreasing the amount of required memory and CPUs to control this disc on the server. 

    From a technology perspective there is no problem. The main issue is cost-wise. Cisco costs more than its competitors.

    As for what I would like to see in the next release, Cisco already has a solution, but in a different profile called the CWOM, Cisco Workload Optimization Manager, and Cisco Intersight. This solution manages and optimizes workloads on the infrastructure and integrates them with the monitoring solution and gives insights and recommendations for the customers. I think it is included on solutions such as the VxRail which has the vROps, vRealize Operations Manager. Cisco did not include this on this solution, but in a separate solution. They have to have a logs server to collect all logs and give insights from all hardware. This is included in the Cisco Intersight but it is not included in the hyper-converged infrastructure solution.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series for six years.

    I am running it now on an implementation project for hyper-converged with a HyperFlex stretched cluster. A solution from hyper-converged, but not such a standard implementation - it is stretched between different sites.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    No problem with stability. I have a customer and I have not spoken to him since the last upgrade one year ago. He didn't face any problem.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series is scalable.

    I think you need one or two people maximum to operate it. They must have different technology experience from different perspectives because they deal with the virtual storage and the servers, but its concept is coming from computing and virtualization. Someone should have the knowledge of all the verticals.

    How are customer service and support?

    Cisco support is great. But when we ask about something, they reply with the standard schema, which makes me confused. Let's say I have a problem with a customer who has a problem in their Dell or Cisco servers and I open a ticket for it. Support replies please check, check, check, check. I know! I checked all this already. I know I have to check this before calling you. This takes time. We have to go directly to our customer and try to solve the problem. Maybe sometimes our customer is solving the problem. I don't like to give them advice that is only go and check one, two, three.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was straightforward. The advanced solution was straightforward from an implementation perspective.

    There was no problem with implementation. It has improved since past versions which had many errors and many bugs.

    If our pre-requisites are ready, deployment and implementation take two days maximum.

    What other advice do I have?

    My advice to anyone considering Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series is that they have to study what the hyper-converged solution is and why they are going into hyper-convergence. Why not use the traditional way? This is the first thing. If they understand the concept, they can very easily go through the implementation because the hyper-converged solution is based on automatic implementation. We have a virtual machine capable of implementing the solution, but in the background there are many automated tasks running. If you don't know what is running in the background you didn't understand anything.

    You have to understand and then go through the automated implementation related to hyper-converged. Any new solution allows you to implement everything automatically, you don't need to implement different components and then integrate them with each other. You have to configure single machine. You can implement everything from that single machine.

    You have to understand why you are going to hyper-converge before you go to the implementation.

    You can dig into it, but you will not understand anything. If you're facing any issue, you can't solve the problem. So when you're implementing for other companies, Cisco or Dell or whatever, they are asking about the pre-requisites. You have to have these pre-requisites before going into the implementation because when you have more information relative to the customer side or the requirements and the pre-requisites, the implementation is straightforward. But if you lack all the pre-requisites you will face many problems and you will not be able to define where they are coming from.

    On a scale of one to ten, I would give Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series a nine.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Buyer's Guide
    Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series
    May 2022
    Learn what your peers think about Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: May 2022.
    598,116 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    MinaMagdy - PeerSpot reviewer
    Senior Infrastructure Solutions Specialist at Fiber Misr
    Real User
    Top 5
    Straightforward to set up and you can manage everything from one place, but it only supports one cache drive per node
    Pros and Cons
    • "The most valuable feature is that you can manage the whole cluster from the traffic interconnect."
    • "With the cache disk fails in Cisco, the whole node fails, and the workload goes down."

    What is our primary use case?

    We are a solution provider and Cisco HyperFlex is one of the products that we propose to our customers. This product is used for hyper-convergence in IT transformation and can be used for very heavy workloads such as VDIs or HAP HANA.

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable feature is that you can manage the whole cluster from the fabric interconnect.

    The physical switches are more reliable than the virtual machines.

    using a virtual machine to manage the cluster, needs lots of pre-configuration & validation steps, as well may lead to cluster fail in case of the fail / corruption of the VM (unless you manage to have a valid backup to restore, with a valid cluster restoration plan), 

    despite the managing of the Cisco Hyperflex, it comes almost preloaded & stand ready for deploying, as well in redundant architecture, which reflect a solid base for managing & reliability deployment. 

    What needs improvement?

    They need to make many improvements to this solution but the most important area is the compression. Most customers are concerned with the compression for a specific workload, and then maintaining it. The performance and compression vary depending on the type of workload; for example with SAS HANA, Cisco forces compression and that affects performance very badly. At the least, the customer should have the option to choose what types of workload should be affected by the data reduction functionality.

    The second point is that they need to work on the erasure code. Cisco doesn't support erasure code, even over flash. If they fix this then they will only waste 25%. With replication and mirroring, it uses 100% of the allocated capacity. This means that Cisco needs to work on the architecture. I have conducted many PoCs and it is a problem that they need to work on.

    Cisco offers a single cache drive cluster, whereas VxRail offers up to four cache disks per drive. When the cache disk fails in Cisco, the whole node fails, and the workload goes down. But when it comes to VxRail, if a cache disk files then only the node fails and the workload remains up and running. This is an area that Cisco needs to work on. Essentially, they have to raise the number of cache disks that can be included in a single node.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We have been working with Cisco HyperFlex for the past four years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    This is a reliable solution

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    This product is quite scalable.

    Our usage of this product may increase but it is up to the customer. For example, when a customer is loyal to Cisco, they will implement HyperFlex. On the other hand, if it's a customer with a hyper-converged infrastructure then they will definitely implement VxRail.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Technical support from Cisco is responsive and depending on the problem, a hardware replacement is offered 24/7, which is good.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I have experience with similar products from other vendors.

    HyperFlex is a very good solution, although not compared to Dell EMC VxRail. Both of them have many good features, although VxRail is better and yet, Cisco is more expensive.

    If you consider my customers to be a community, 70% of them have VxRail and 30% of them have HyperFlex.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is straightforward. The length of deployment depends on the number of channels but for between four and five nodes, it takes approximately two weeks.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    This is an expensive solution, although Cisco will offer it free of charge when there is a large networking opportunity that arises. The licensing is perpetual and the only thing that you may need to pay for on a monthly basis is if you're going to use their cloud-based management features. This requires a subscription.

    What other advice do I have?

    Cisco offers the on-cloud management system for HyperFlex but most of our customers that are using a hyper-converged infrastructure prefer to build their own, private cloud. In most cases, they have this solution installed on-premises.

    Cisco HyperFlex is a product that I can recommend, although VxRail is my first choice. Depending on the customer, their environment, and history with Cisco, I will recommend one of these products over the other.

    I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
    Senior Account Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
    MSP
    Stable, with okay technical support, and a validated design approach for components
    Pros and Cons
    • "The solution is stable."
    • "The initial setup can be a bit complex."

    What is our primary use case?

    We deploy these for our customers, we're in the reseller space.

    Use cases are typically around data center revolutions, consolidations in virtualization density, and being able to scale both up and out.

    What is most valuable?

    On the architectural side of it, there's the single pane of glass. In the hyper-converged, there is that validated design approach of having all of the components which should work together.

    The solution is stable.

    Technical support is better than most.

    What needs improvement?

    The pricing can always be better on everything. 

    The interdependencies of each of these functions and the configuration side are something that needs to be carefully architected so that if something isn't working in my memory stick, it doesn't have a cascading waterfall effect through the rest of my operation. The interdependency could be improved so that everything will not be so interrelated.

    The initial setup can be a bit complex. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We've been a partner with Cisco for over 20 years, and, as it pertains to HyperFlex, we probably deployed the first HyperFlex in the Northeast region - and that was probably four years ago. We did it when it first came out.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    In terms of stability, it's way more stable than when it first came out. The earlier evolutions of this were like building the plane as we were flying it.

    How are customer service and support?

    Cisco tech support, as bad as it can be, is better than most.

    How was the initial setup?

    There's additional complexity around the solution.

    In a hyper-converged scenario, the financial outcome is that you need to further align your refresh cycles of your storage, of your compute stack, and of your networking. From the client-side, that can also lead to a little bit of solution lock-in, a slight vendor lock-in.

    Before, if I wanted to see maybe if my storage is up, and I'm looking at the time to adopt all-flash SSD or putting NVME in my environment, and updating my either blade centers, or pizza box servers, et cetera, it would all fit together. Even though that there's modularity built into the hyper-converged, there's still a little bit of a tax where you have to overbuy on other resources to provision that you want.

    You don't need a huge team to deploy the solution. A deployment team is lightweight. It's two different individuals or maybe three with project management included.

    What other advice do I have?

    We're a gold partner, one of their leading partners in our area.

    Historically, I'm not very much pro-hyper-converge as there's a lot to the market still. What happens is, if it's poorly architected, that if something's screwed up, everything is screwed up. That's the part of the issue with the hyper-converged. You've got it very tightly knit. However, there are still advantages to the separation of failure domains, whether that be your compute, your storage, your memory.

    I would take a Cisco Flex approach over a Cisco hyper-converged approach, all day, every day. It's the most widely adopted platform in the world for converged architecture and has a knowledge base that is way larger and has way more experience running. Also, just because you have to update one piece of it doesn't mean you have to update all pieces of it. My honest opinion is to still see what else is in the market to validate your approach to go with an all Cisco solution in the hyper-converged space. 

    I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
    Flag as inappropriate
    Presales Consultant at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    Quite scalable, stable, and offers good technical support
    Pros and Cons
    • "It's very easy to use and quite a mature product."
    • "The pricing is pretty expensive."

    What is our primary use case?

    A client typically uses the solution for the VDI critical application and for the containerization as well. It's a critical application and he X location and the hybrid or multi cloud.

    What is most valuable?

    The solution is easy to deploy as they're based on ECS. We buy an ECS Manager so that we can scale out easily. We can also integrate with external storage. We can also scale for computing or storage only.

    The product is quite stable.

    It's very easy to use and quite a mature product.

    What needs improvement?

    As a fairly mature product, I can't think of any features that are lacking per se. 

    The pricing is pretty expensive.

    Right now they are coming into the public cloud, we want to be seeing HyperFlex integration with public clouds such as AWS, Azure or Google. 

    I need to see the feature more use cases for the backup and restore functionalities or how  we can expand the cluster to the public cloud.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the solution since about 2018. It's been about two years or so. It hasn't been too long.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The solution is very stable. It doesn't have bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very good.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We do plan to continue using the product and expanding it as needed. 

    Cisco is better for enterprise-level organizations.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Cisco has great technical support. We're quite satisfied with their level of service. Cisco does offer full support for the product, which is quite helpful. They have a good amount of knowledge on their product and they are very good at sharing the information and insights they have. 

    However, in comparison, Nutanix technical support is better in that they are not only knowledgeable but responsive as well.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    As partners, we use a variety of solutions such as Nutanix, Cisco HyperFlex, and NetApp HCI. We don't for example, have partnerships with HPE or SimpliVity.

    If you were comparing Cisco, to, for example, Nutanix, Cisco is more expensive.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is not too complex. The installation is pretty easy as the HyperFlex has a deployment engine. We can just follow the wizard and go over everything step-by-step. Cisco has guidelines about the installation in the portal which makes it very convenient to get the insights you need.

    The deployment is very fast and takes typically under one hour.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The solution can be pretty expensive. It's not the cheapest option on the market.

    What other advice do I have?

    My role in the company is pre-sales. We offer this solution to our clients. As a partner, we don't use Cisco HyperFlex, but we propose HyperFlex for the customer.

    For the deployment, we can deploy for the DC and DRC side, for the synchronous replication, and also for the stress cluster, we can also deploy for the X location as the HyperFlex has a HyperFex extraction for the X location.

    I'm in Indonesia, and in this particular country/region, this solution isn't really used very widely. Nutanix is more famous in Indonesia, as it can be used by the SMB customer or small customers up to enterprises. Most hyper-converged solutions that are used in Indonesia are Nutanix.

    I would recommend the solution to other organizations, however, only if it made sense and fit their company's needs.

    Overall, I would rate the product eight out of ten.

    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
    MichaelZhang - PeerSpot reviewer
    IT Director at Guangdong Technion Institute of Technology
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Flexible solution with some stability issues
    Pros and Cons
    • "Its most valuable feature is its flexibility."
    • "In the next release, I would like to see them able to connect to the public cloud."

    What is our primary use case?

    Typically we use this Cisco HyperFlex cluster as our local server virtualization platform. We have all our services running in this cluster. In other words, we could say this is our local data center for all our business systems as well the core components of our IT infrastructure.

    At this moment, we haven't upgraded to the latest version although Cisco has been encouraging us to upgrade, since they recently published a new version. We will schedule this change maybe next month.

    What is most valuable?

    I think its most valuable feature is its flexibility.

    What needs improvement?

    There are a lot of features that could be improved. We sorted out one critical issue left by the initial deployment team, our external partners. They made a mistake, a wrong configuration regarding the network settings. That left us a very, very painful troubleshooting process. Eventually, after four years, we sorted it out. After fixing that the system was stable. We even thought that maybe this is the root cause of those hardware failures.

    In the next release, I would like to see them able to connect to the public cloud.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    The first time that I started using the Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series platform was in 2016 and I'm still using it today.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Before I got the second group of this system, I would have said it was quite stable. However, with the second cluster that I received, I experienced lots of hardware issues, and almost all with the RAM stick. The memory stick had been replaced by Cisco due to some hardware failure. It was really painful, and we couldn't sort out the reason. Also we experienced some hard drive failures for which Cisco provided a replacement. So I would say it's not quite stable.

    It has very high rate of hardware failure.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We have nine people using it in my department, IT. We are the key users. They rely on us for running the system. So far, it is the only system I have to run. And in recent years, it is running more stably.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Their customer service is very efficient. Usually if we experience some technical issue, we open a case and Cisco Global Support will be on within one hour. So that's very efficient.

    How was the initial setup?

    We have our external partners to help us with the installation and configuration, and generally speaking, it's quite straightforward.

    At the beginning of our project, I remember that it took about one week to set up.

    What about the implementation team?

    There were three people involved in the system configuration and set up. One guy was in my team and another two from the external partners. They were responsible for the hands on configuration and my guy was responsible for the acceptance test and the communication between the university and the supplier.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    In terms of their license, they don't actually call it a license, it's called technical support. We have to renew that after certain periods. And it's not cheap.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would recommend Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series only in a certain situation.

    Right now, considering many other external constraints, it is very hard to recommend it to people, especially if they are based in mainland China.

    On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series a seven.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Antony K - PeerSpot reviewer
    Solution Architect at COPYCAT LIMITED
    Reseller
    Top 20
    Straightforward to set up with good management and very good stability
    Pros and Cons
    • "The management feature is the solution's most valuable aspect."
    • "We need to be able to scale out and not just up. When you want to scale up or scale out, you are quite limited."

    What is most valuable?

    The management feature is the solution's most valuable aspect.

    Overall, the solution is pretty good.

    The initial setup is pretty straightforward. 

    We've found the stability to be very good.

    What needs improvement?

    The pricing of the solution could be improved. It's a bit too high. We find that most customers can not make it work with their budgets.

    When it comes to the virtualization layer, we have issues. We can scale up, and yet we can't add storage.

    We need to be able to scale out and not just up. When you want to scale up or scale out, you are quite limited.

    It would be ideal to have the flexibility to scale out whereby you are able to do a single type of commodity upgrade. For example, if we could upgrade the memory only, or upgrade the process only or storage only,.

    There is a general over-reliance on VMware, the form of the software layer which now includes things like Nutanix. Some customers - especially around Oracle - have a preference to not work around VMware. That's why we need more flexibility to be able to do any event on the top layer.

    It would be ideal if we had local support here in Kenya.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I can't recall for how long I've been dealing with the product. It's been a while. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability is quite good on the solution. It's not buggy or glitchy. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance is reliable. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We primarily deal with small and medium-sized companies.

    While the solution can scale up, it can't scale out, and this is a problem for us.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Technical support is okay on the computer side. However, when it comes to the virtualization layer, that's where the problem is. I've been having issues. We can only scale up. We cannot scale out. I can't add an additional storage. We're trying to work this through with configurations and we're running into a lot of trouble.

    Also, we'd like to have local support in our country. Right now, we are lacking that.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I also work with other vendors, such as Dell.

    For small companies and environments full of Cisco I recommend that a company uses Cisco, as the transition is easy as the UCS manager connects well to Hyperflex.  

    However, for an organization that doesn't have a clear growth plan, and grows randomly, PowerFlex is better, as it affords more flexibility and it's easier to upgrade.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is really easy if you are using Hyperflex money.

    I wouldn't describe the initial setup as difficult or complex.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The pricing is high for the solution. The costs need to be adjusted. 

    The licensing is okay, however, the harder infrastructure needs to be adjusted.

    What other advice do I have?

    We are a reseller.

    My advice to other organizations considering the solution is to make sure you plan before deployment and put into place a proper plan. The initial pre-project timeline puts into place a proper plan and based on your focus. It will make sure that whatever you put into place meets your requirements both right away and into the future. 

    I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: reseller
    AshwaniRana - PeerSpot reviewer
    Senior Technical Consultant at Hitachi Systems, Ltd.
    Consultant
    Top 20
    Very scalable, very secure, and good performance, but needs better pricing and a SaaS-based version
    Pros and Cons
    • "It is very scalable. It is also very secure. Cisco's security portfolio is integrated with it, which makes it secure. It is a platform-based device. Its performance is also fairly good in comparison to any other solution."
    • "If we compare it with VMware, the VMware product is basically very open, and it can be easily integrated with any platform. VMware product is also available on the cloud and is not an appliance-based product, whereas Cisco HyperFlex is an appliance-based product. Companies that want to use HCI as a platform or as a service would prefer something without an appliance. A SaaS-based product is better for a customer who is using the cloud and has multiple resources, workflows, and devices on the cloud and wants to go for a hyper-converged solution. This is where improvement is needed. In addition to an appliance-based product, Cisco should provide a SaaS-based product. Its price should be lower. Cisco needs to work on the pricing model for this product. Its price is a big road blocker when competing against Nutanix and VMware, which are its main competitors."

    What is most valuable?

    It is very scalable. It is also very secure. Cisco's security portfolio is integrated with it, which makes it secure.

    It is a platform-based device. Its performance is also fairly good in comparison to any other solution.

    What needs improvement?

    If we compare it with VMware, the VMware product is basically very open, and it can be easily integrated with any platform. VMware product is also available on the cloud and is not an appliance-based product, whereas Cisco HyperFlex is an appliance-based product. Companies that want to use HCI as a platform or as a service would prefer something without an appliance. A SaaS-based product is better for a customer who is using the cloud and has multiple resources, workflows, and devices on the cloud and wants to go for a hyper-converged solution. This is where improvement is needed. In addition to an appliance-based product, Cisco should provide a SaaS-based product.

    Its price should be lower. Cisco needs to work on the pricing model for this product. Its price is a big road blocker when competing against Nutanix and VMware, which are its main competitors.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using this solution for the last two years. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It is stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is scalable.

    How was the initial setup?

    I don't set it up, but based on the information that I have from my customers, it is not difficult to set it up. It is easy to set up, but it is not easier than a SaaS-based product. Our customers buy only its latest version.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Its price is high. Cisco needs to work on the pricing model for this product. Nutanix or VMware are cheaper products, and they provide almost the same functionality. Its price is a big road blocker when we are working with an end customer, and Nutanix and VMware are in competition. If they can reduce its price, it is actually a better choice for customers.

    What other advice do I have?

    The OEMs from Nutanix, VMware, and Cisco have more or less the same features and functionality. The only thing that is missing in this solution is that it doesn't have a SaaS-based version. I would definitely recommend this solution for customers who are looking for an appliance-based product. Cisco HyperFlex is the best appliance-based product. It is better than Nutanix, even though Nutanix is more cost-effective than Cisco.

    I would rate Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series a seven out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
    Updated: May 2022
    Product Categories
    Hyper-Converged (HCI)
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.