Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Compute Hyperconverged vs VMware vSAN comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 2026

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

Cisco Compute Hyperconverged
Ranking in HCI
21st
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
VMware vSAN
Ranking in HCI
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
234
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

Ashok Dwivedi - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Manager Network Operation & Deployment Working with Airtel India at Airtel
Improved telecom control functions and security have exposed user plane performance gaps
I see that the hardware side and performance concerns are prevalent, even in Cisco hardware used in the card platform. We have observed the same issues with Cisco Compute Hyperconverged platforms as well, indicating a performance issue. Regarding the stability rating, it should be around seven because the support from Cisco is nice, but the performance of the product does not meet our preferences. For additional features to enhance competitiveness, Cisco needs to improve their hardware utilization performance specifically. There is a significant gap between the throughput they recommend and what commercial enterprises experience, which is around a thirty percent gap. If we talk about Red Hat or other external platforms, in that scenario, it is better for enterprises that want a complete support package to go with Cisco. However, if the enterprise has the capability to maintain in-house, it may be better to consider different hyperscalers. Another concern with Cisco is that they are trying to bind customers to specific hardware.
ShyamikaThamel - PeerSpot reviewer
Associate Tech Specialists at Seatrium
Managing mixed RAID workloads has improved data protection and delivers strong performance
VMware vSAN can be improved in certain areas. In cases involving our large data stores with large VMs, we experience some latency, not during normal operation, but during database backup operations. We observed latency due to buffer issues from the top-of-the-rack switches. These issues are mostly network-related because all storage data traffic travels through the network. I have recently used Nutanix, and I observed that Nutanix provides better performance than VMware vSAN due to its data locality features. VMware vSAN is now providing data locality, but we did not use that option. If VMware vSAN provides additional features in the next release, such as the VM balancing feature called DRS on the cluster that VMware previously had, it would be beneficial. With DRS, VMs can move easily from one node to another within the same cluster. Nutanix does not provide that flexibility. When placing a VM on a cluster in Nutanix, the placement uses a balancing component. After that, the VM remains on the same host. If any contention occurs on the CPU or memory side, the VM stays in place until contention happens. If issues occur, the VM migrates to another host while transferring all objects to the same host. This is how their data locality is maintained. When a VM moves to any host, it moves with all VM objects. VMware vSAN does not currently offer this option. If a VM moves to another host, it accesses the disk object through the network, which increases latency. VMware vSAN now offers an option to select data locality, but it does not function like Nutanix. This is why some latency remains. If VMware vSAN can improve this feature, it would be very helpful and VMware would regain its top position.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Regarding Cisco Compute Hyperconverged's data protection capabilities in terms of business continuity and protection, I would rate them as a nine, as there are no concerns concerning protection."
"There is not a lot of maintenance required."
"We get better performance with a better cost efficiency."
"It is easy to find information out there, not only from searching the web, but even the times I have engaged VMware support."
"The deduplication and compression are excellent."
"The feature we have found most valuable is the compatibility of VMware products with VCF and VMware Cloud Foundation."
"Compared with competing products, it provides great cost savings."
"Data management and recovery processes are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable features are the encryption, deduplication, compression, and the ability to manage all of your storage within your server rack."
 

Cons

"Regarding the stability rating, it should be around seven because the support from Cisco is nice, but the performance of the product does not meet our preferences."
"More focus has to be put on deduplication and compression with a hybrid architecture."
"The solution could maybe improve failure protection."
"There needs to be an increase in the supported memory and hard disk space, as it is an area where the product currently has certain shortcomings."
"Its price could be improved. It is too expensive for our clients."
"If you don't have vRealize Operations, it would detract from usability of VSAN."
"The price for the hard drive, for vSAN, is very expensive."
"I would like to see more support for applications. I think currently it only supports applications between two vSAN clusters."
"As a software-based product, it requires a lot of system resources."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Clients have to pay for VMware vSAN licensing based on the number of CPUs. The purchases would be lifetime or perpetual, but you need to have support, e.g. the support is negotiated from one, two, three, or four years."
"It is an expensive solution. There should be more flexible with licensing to allow small businesses the essentials of the solution's features."
"If they could reduce the cost, it would be better. Licensing costs are something that they could take care of. If you are a smaller and strong IT team, then VMware vSAN is a very good product. If you want to expand in the service provider space, then you will have to go for an open-source solution like OpenStack. We are now looking at OpenStack because we sell licensing costs. We are a service provider, so the IT component data is a substantial component in our overall costing. We feel that OpenStack might help us to cut down the licensing cost. Therefore, we are looking at SAS storage instead of vSAN. SAS is open source, but it is not wise to have open source without having the backend support. We are using RedHat SAS, and it is an open-source solution. You can also have a free version, but we are using it with support from RedHat so that we have somebody to back us up in case we have a problem. If you do normal business, then IT expense is 1% or 2% of the total turnover. The higher licensing costs sometimes don't make difference to the big companies who are not service providers and are using it only for their internal use. For them, the IT cost is 1% or 2%, but for an IT service provider, the IT costs will go up to 15% to 16% of the total cost of the operations. This is where the licensing costs become irrelevant. For example, the licensing cost of using VMware, VC, and vSAN is 8% of my monthly revenue. Every month, I pay about $35,000, and, with the revised plan, it will be something like $50,000 or revenue of 600k per month, which means almost 8% of the revenue is going into VMware licensing. In a very competitive world, 8% as a cost element is huge. So, if I can bring it down to 2%, I save 6% in revenue expenditure. In terms of profit, 6% of 30% is something like another 25% increase in my profit. My profit can be almost 25%. It would be 20% to 25% in case I am able to handle the licensing costs and bring them to a very low level. Because these IT costs are substantial for us, that is why we are going with OpenStack. OpenStack has a limitation that it requires more hardware. There will be some increase in the hardware cost, but overall we will save 5% to 6% of our licensing cost by using OpenStack."
"It is not that expensive, and it is not even cheap. If it is designed in a proper way, it has good pricing, but if you do oversizing, the price will be high. There are different licensing models."
"We did consider other hyperconverged solutions. It usually came down to price. vSan was the most cost effective thing."
"The cost is expensive. I purchased two servers. The hardware cost was $19,000. The software cost for these two servers, including the vSAN, was $30,000, which is $11,000 more than the hardware. Then I had to pay another $5,000 for installation and implementation for professional services. In total, it was $54,000 for two vSAN Servers."
"The product's price has been increasing lately...VMware vSAN is expensive."
"VMware vSAN is an expensive platform. We purchase its yearly license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which HCI solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business100
Midsize Enterprise58
Large Enterprise129
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Compute Hyperconverged?
Their pricing is acceptable because they are trying to match the market.
What needs improvement with Cisco Compute Hyperconverged?
I see that the hardware side and performance concerns are prevalent, even in Cisco hardware used in the card platform. We have observed the same issues with Cisco Compute Hyperconverged platforms a...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Compute Hyperconverged?
I have only used Cisco Compute Hyperconverged for telecom equipment, specifically telecom network functions. I cannot comment on other applications, but when using the hyperscaler for telecom, part...
What Is The Biggest Difference Between vSAN And VxRail?
While both run on the vSAN technology from VMware, vSAN needs to be deployed on vSAN ready nodes while VxRail is an engineered system. The choice to choose which technology depends on two major fac...
How does HPE Simplivity compare with VMware vSAN?
HPE SimpliVity is a hyper-converged infrastructure solution that is primarily geared to mid-sized companies. We researched VMware vSAN but found HPE was a better option for us. HPE SimpliVity has ...
How does VMware vSAN compare with Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct?
We found VMware’s vSAN was easy to set up, configure, and manage compared to other solutions we considered. It is best suited for small- to medium-sized organizations. It is easy to create load bal...
 

Also Known As

No data available
vSAN
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Read Some Case Studies At Home Cloud CaribCINgroupDiscovery Check out the Rest of our Customer Stories Here
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, Broadcom, Nutanix and others in HCI. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.