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 #15 with an average rating of 8.3, while NetApp is ranked #11 with an average rating of 7.2. Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds a 4.1% mindshare in CS, compared to NetApp’s 3.7% 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 4 Amazon FSx reviews

1,470 Views
779 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Azure NetApp Files

Read 17 Azure NetApp Files reviews

2,499 Views
1,175 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: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,873 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

15th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

File System Software (5th), File and Object Storage (15th)

Azure NetApp Files

Ranking in Cloud Storage

11th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Migration (6th), Public Cloud Storage Services (12th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Cloud Storage category, the mindshare of Amazon FSx is 4.1%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Azure NetApp Files is 3.7%, down from 8.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Storage Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Azure NetApp Files	3.7%
Amazon FSx	4.1%
Other	92.2%

Cloud Storage

Featured Reviews

Sugan Balakrishnan

Senior Design Engineer at Clovertex

Provides seamless research data management with effortless setup

From my experience, there are areas in Amazon FSx where more performance is needed, as they will be looking for higher IOPS. Sometimes we go with Weka or other solutions due to this need, so it should have more IO capacity when there is a demand. More performance is needed specifically in the IO area.

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

"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."

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

"On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Amazon FSx a ten."

"The shared storage capability is highly valuable."

"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."

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

"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."

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

"This solution definitely makes us more efficient in being able to provide storage quickly to our customers in the Azure Cloud."

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

"I like the SnapMirror feature in Azure NetApp Files. It helps me create backups with snapshots and makes data recovery and compression."

"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."

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."

"From my experience, there are areas in Amazon FSx where more performance is needed, as they will be looking for higher IOPS."

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

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

"The main area for improvement is in the support ticket system. Since it's a SaaS platform, support tickets are managed by Microsoft or NetApp backend. This can sometimes lead to cross-functional challenges for organizations."

"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."

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

"We would like for the files which are coming in that we can version them. So, if a file is accidentally deleted, there should have a recycle bin option where we can go back, and at least once, clean it up."

"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."

"Reserved Instances for Azure NetApp Files would improve more use cases, making them more valuable in Azure as the cost would be reduced."

"This solution would be improved with more innovation."

"The main hurdle in promoting this solution is the price. Its price definitely requires an improvement. It is more expensive than other options, so customers go for a cheaper option."

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."

"The performance has improved by about 30 percent."

"It is expensive, especially with NetApp Ultra Storage."

"Its price is double the price of the premium disks, which is the main reason why customers don't go for this solution in the end."

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

"The solution’s combination of the ease of use, simplicity, and reduction in IT management versus the cost has helped a lot. It is very fast to deploy. It's very easy to maintain. You don't have to do a lot in the cloud to maintain this thing, so it gives good performance. It's fast to deploy, easy to maintain, and it gives a better performance. These are the most basic three criteria for any application. This saves cost because the manpower you need to deploy is going down. You're getting better performance and not buying new resources. You have resources available in the cloud. It's just a couple of clicks, then you're good to go."

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

"NetApp is a premium offering, so it's not a cheap product, but it is well-priced. It combines a couple of properties which customers like us are willing to pay. Could it be cheaper? Yes, but if you combine fully supported, fully managed, easily provisioned, scalable, and quick all in one product, it's a good selling point. You can ask a lot of money for all these. If you have a use case like we do, it's a perfect match. It's like the Porsche of storage solutions in the cloud. It is totally worth the cost."

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

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

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

University

10%

Retailer

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Educational Organization

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	13

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon FSx?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Amazon FSx?

Our customers mainly use Amazon FSx for high-performance computing. Our customers are mainly in the Life Science and Pharma industries. The majority of people are looking at S3 as their destination...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Amazon FSx?

There is an ongoing project where my customers are exploring the FSx solution, but not yet for AI-driven projects; they plan to in the future. For those who want to use Amazon FSx, I recommend it a...

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 15% of the time

Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) vs Amazon FSx

Compared 8% of the time

Everpure FlashBlade vs Amazon FSx

Compared 7% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Amazon FSx

Compared 6% of the time

Nasuni vs Amazon FSx

Compared 5% of the time

More Amazon FSx Competitors

Microsoft Azure File Storage vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 16% of the time

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 14% of the time

Amazon S3 vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 8% of the time

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 7% of the time

Dropbox Business - Enterprise vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 4% of the time

More Azure NetApp Files Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cloud Storage

March 2026

Download Amazon FSx product report

Buyer's Guide

Azure NetApp Files

March 2026

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 offers flexibility, speed, and tight Active Directory integration, making it versatile. Its scalability, rapid response time, and replication capabilities like SnapMirror enhance its value, along with SEC compliance through SnapLock and efficient database management.

Azure NetApp Files is a robust service for unstructured data storage within Microsoft Azure and on-premises environments. It supports NFS and CIFS protocol testing, SQL backups, SAP virtualization, Azure Virtual Desktop, and event collection. This service facilitates seamless provisioning, non-disruptive resizing, and fast snapshots for disaster recovery. Known for high availability and cost-effective throughput, its ease of use and security make it preferred by users. Issues with high pricing and support highlight areas for enhancement, alongside desires for expanded regional availability, better security, and integration with diverse solutions.

What are the key features of Azure NetApp Files?

Flexibility: Supports diverse applications with robust Active Directory integration.
Scalability: Easily adjusts to increased performance demands.
Fast Snapshotting: Enhances disaster recovery capabilities.
SnapMirror: Provides effective replication features.
SnapLock: Ensures SEC compliance.

What benefits and ROI should users look for?

High Availability: Delivers reliable performance.
Cost-effective Throughput: Balances performance with expenditure.
Ease of Use: Simplifies data management tasks.
Non-disruptive Resizing: Facilitates seamless storage adjustments.
Enhanced Security: Protects sensitive data effectively.

In educational contexts, Azure NetApp Files shines by offering seamless data handling and high IOPS performance, supporting high-demand environments like research facilities. For enterprises, it aids legacy system migrations and optimizes virtual environments while enhancing data protection and file share performance.

NetApp

Sample Customers

Neiman Marcus, T Mobile, Docxellent, Matrix, Lyell

SAP, Restaurant Magic

Buyer's Guide

Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files

March 2026

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: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,873 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.