Amazon FSx vs Azure NetApp Files comparison

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and NetApp are both solutions in the Cloud Storage category. Amazon Web Services (AWS) is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.3, while NetApp is ranked #7 with an average rating of 7.3. Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds a 3.8% mindshare in CS, compared to NetApp’s 8.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of NetApp users who would recommend it.

Amazon FSx

Read 3 Amazon FSx reviews

266 Views
214 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Azure NetApp Files

Read 17 Azure NetApp Files reviews

1,799 Views
1,136 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Amazon FSx

Azure NetApp Files

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Amazon FSx and Azure NetApp Files based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 849,686 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Amazon FSx

Ranking in Cloud Storage

14th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

File System Software (5th), File and Object Storage (17th)

Azure NetApp Files

Ranking in Cloud Storage

7th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Migration (2nd), Public Cloud Storage Services (8th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Cloud Storage category, the mindshare of Amazon FSx is 3.8%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Azure NetApp Files is 8.8%, down from 10.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Storage

Featured Reviews

MuhammadAzhar Khan

Senior DevOps Engineer at Alibaba Group

Shared storage capabilities provide enterprise value with good reliability

Amazon FSx is more costly compared to other storage solutions like EBS or EFS. The auto-scaling feature should be improved, as it currently includes downtime. I need to manually increase the storage, which is not ideal. Integrating FSx with Windows Server is challenging; it's a long process involving Active Directory (AD) setup and synchronization.

Read full review

AjayKumar13

Cloud/Data/Database Manager at a government with 10,001+ employees

Fast, reliable, and helps meet our SLAs

The most valuable feature is that the sixty-terabyte database snapshot can be done in less than two to three minutes. It is faster. It is quicker. It is reliable. You don't need to take the snapshot. Snapshots are compressed. It doesn't take storage from the back end. It takes three minutes to do sixty terabytes of the database. You don't have to go to the tape and store it outside, which takes hours and hours. It also uses a lot less of the storage. It's very easy to restore or copy the snapshots to other locations for disaster recovery. There are a lot of benefits. In terms of the snapshot's rapid restore capability, we were testing the load of performance testing, and we needed to rebuild the DR site. If I need to rebuild the DR for a standby database, it takes sixty terabytes to copy onto the another site, which will take at least a day. Now, the snapshot is easy. We just copy the snapshots, and then we do the cross-region application. The snapshots came along with that, and that's where we were able to build the DR site within a few hours rather than days. All together, instead of a four-day process, instead of a day.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"The shared storage capability is highly valuable."

"FSx operates as an independent service, not tied to any server, which eliminates dependencies between applications for storage."

"I rate the stability of Amazon FSx ten out of ten."

"We used it for disaster recovery perspective behind a number of resources, like batch services and RDS."

"Using NetApp Files got us out of a really difficult situation quickly, effectively, and at a reasonable cost."

"Since we have NetApp's internally, we use the SnapMirror predominantly for this process in the cloud which is beneficial."

"I think the easiest part is, when you do a comparison, it is the throughput versus the cost. And it's much easier to set up."

"The critical features of this solution are SnapMirror for replication, data protection, and SnapLock."

"Its security and ease of use are most valuable."

"It has saved a lot of time. Because in the older, conventional hardware system, they need to raise a ticket to go to storage engineering, then storage engineering would increased the size. Now, it's dynamic. You don't have to do anything. This improved the time by more than 50 percent."

"The most valuable feature is that the sixty-terabyte database snapshot can be done in less than two to three minutes."

More Azure NetApp Files pros

Cons

"Amazon FSx is more costly compared to other storage solutions like EBS or EFS."

"A direct FTP feature would be beneficial instead of relying on transmission services."

"I've been facing a challenge when doing a failover from FSx side. AWS console does not refresh within a half hour."

"The solution needs to improve it's ABS environment."

"I have a hunch that storage could be now the most expensive portion of our monthly bill. So I can imagine that, not this year, but next year we will be talking about looking deeper into ways how we can optimize the cost."

"Azure NetApp Files could improve by being more diverse to integrate better with other solutions, such as Splunk and the on-premise version. There are some use cases that are not covered natively by Azure. It is not the best solution because it is not external from the cloud which for me is the best type of solution."

"The deployment process is somewhat complex compared to other storage solutions."

"We would like to see more paired regions for the replication."

"I would like to see multi-zone redundancy so that I don't have to worry about it. I just back up my data to that one SMB share and I know that it's replicated to a different region."

"I don’t like the solution’s configuration and support."

"The initial setup was not straightforward. We had help from the NetApp team."

More Azure NetApp Files cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The lowest price I have paid is $370 or $380 per month, while the highest can exceed $3,000 per month."

"We are currently on a pay-as-you-go model with the storage that we use."

"In the cloud, pricing depends on how you manage it. It's not necessarily cheap, but it's all about optimizing charges and showing the cost back. So, it's more about managing the expenses rather than being inherently expensive or cheap."

"The pricing depends on your scaling and consumption."

"The price of Azure NetApp Files could be better."

"The licensing fees for this solution vary, ranging from a single shelf to a full suite."

"The performance has improved by about 30 percent."

"It is expensive in small environments, which could be better. The reason is the four terabyte minimum. A one terabyte minimum would be better."

"Our pricing has not been determined because we are still waiting on additional features."

More Azure NetApp Files pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Storage solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Computer Software Company

11%

Retailer

Educational Organization

28%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon FSx?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Amazon FSx?

I use Amazon FSx as a shared storage service for Windows, particularly when there are multiple Windows servers and a need for shared storage. I use it when shared resources with different servers, ...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Amazon FSx?

I must be aware of my specific use case and choose the solution accordingly. I use FSx when shared storage is required without the need for internet connectivity. It is cheaper to use Amazon S3 whe...

See all answers

How does Azure NetApp Files compare to NetApp ONTAP?

Azure NetApp Files is a Microsoft Azure file storage service built on NetApp technology. The platform combines the file capabilities of Azure and NetApp to move critical file-based applications to ...

See all answers

What do you like most about Azure NetApp Files?

The availability is good, meaning downtime or network issues rarely occur. The system also offers flexibility, allowing for increases in data volume, IOPS, and other capabilities without requiring ...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure NetApp Files?

It is expensive, especially with NetApp Ultra Storage.

See all answers

Comparisons

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP vs Amazon FSx

Compared 22% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Amazon FSx

Compared 12% of the time

Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) vs Amazon FSx

Compared 9% of the time

Pure Storage FlashBlade vs Amazon FSx

Compared 9% of the time

Nasuni vs Amazon FSx

Compared 8% of the time

More Amazon FSx Competitors

Microsoft Azure File Storage vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 37% of the time

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 29% of the time

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 8% of the time

Nasuni vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 7% of the time

NetApp ONTAP vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 3% of the time

More Azure NetApp Files Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cloud Storage

March 2025

Download Amazon FSx product report

Buyer's Guide

Azure NetApp Files

April 2025

Download Azure NetApp Files product report

Also Known As

Amazon FSx for Windows File Server, Amazon FSx for Lustre

NetApp ANF, ANF

Overview

Amazon FSx makes it easy and cost effective to launch and run popular file systems. With Amazon FSx, you can leverage the rich feature sets and fast performance of widely-used open source and commercially-licensed file systems, while avoiding time-consuming administrative tasks like hardware provisioning, software configuration, patching, and backups. It provides cost-efficient capacity and high levels of reliability, and it integrates with other AWS services so that you can manage and use the file systems in cloud-native ways.

Amazon FSx provides you with two file systems to choose from: Amazon FSx for Windows File Server for enterprise workloads and Amazon FSx for Lustre for high-performance workloads.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Azure NetApp Files is designed for unstructured data, virtualized SAP systems, SQL backups, NFS and CIFS protocols, Azure Virtual Desktop storage, and optimizing file share services. It supports high performance and networking integration in Microsoft Azure.

Azure NetApp Files offers features such as SnapMirror for data protection, rapid provisioning, elastic scaling, and ultra-fast SQL backup and restore. It provides a seamless experience with fast snapshotting, high availability, security, and ease of setup. Users benefit from significant performance improvements and the ability to manage substantial workload migrations effortlessly. This service is ideal for environments like Azure Kubernetes Service and cloud EPM platforms, where speed, flexibility, and performance are crucial.

What are the key features?

Flexibility: Adaptable to diverse storage needs.
Rapid response time: Ensures quick data access and operations.
SnapMirror: Provides replication and data protection.
SEC compliance: SnapLock ensures regulatory adherence.
Ultra-fast SQL backup: Quicker backup and restore operations.
Elastic scaling: Easily adjusts resources based on demand.
Fast snapshotting: Enables quick data snapshots.
High availability: Ensures consistent data access.
Security: Robust measures for data protection.

What are the expected benefits and ROI?

Performance: Notable improvement in processing speeds.
Simplicity of setup: Easy deployment and configuration.
Scalable management: Handles significant workload migrations with ease.
Cost efficiency: Allows comparing throughput versus cost effectively.

Azure NetApp Files is implemented in various industries requiring robust file storage solutions, from educational environments where performance boosts are critical to businesses leveraging Azure Kubernetes Service for containerized applications. It supports high-demand environments, optimizing data management and improving efficiency.

NetApp

Sample Customers

Neiman Marcus, T Mobile, Docxellent, Matrix, Lyell

SAP, Restaurant Magic

Buyer's Guide

Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files

April 2025

Free Report: Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files

Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files report.

See our list of best Cloud Storage vendors.

We monitor all Cloud Storage 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.