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

Cisco HyperFlex HX-Series [EOL] vs Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 HyperFlex HX-Series [...
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
90
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat Hyperconverged Infr...
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
HCI (24th)
 

Featured Reviews

Nuno Mendes - PeerSpot reviewer
High performance solution that makes it easy to efficiently manage VM resources
In our case as a credit recovery company working with the state, our infrastructure is fixed and stable as we don't have the same need for growth as other types of companies. That said, one of the biggest problems with HyperFlex HX is that if you want to adjust your solution in terms of processing power, memory, or disk capacity, you have to buy completely new hosts. From a financial perspective, it can be very expensive to do so, and from a legal perspective, there are all kinds of compliance issues we would have to sort out before buying any new solution or application. Since we as a company will only be operating for perhaps the next ten years, when our HyperFlex solution comes to its end-of-life in 2024 our next step will likely not be with HyperFlex or any other solution from Cisco. Instead, from a financial point of view, we will likely turn toward a cloud solution because, that way, we won't have to spend so much money on physical infrastructure. We are, after all, only a small company and HyperFlex can be very expensive for other companies of our size, whether in Portugal or elsewhere like the United States. One other area for improvement is in regard to HyperFlex's integration with VMware. HyperFlex integrates with a specific version of VMware in such a way that HyperFlex doesn't always resolve security issues with VMware at the same pace as what you see in native implementations of VMware. This has happened in one or two situations in the past. On the other hand, the integration is otherwise adequate, especially in terms of availability and virtualization features (such as being able to split up each of our four hosts within VMware).
PS
Consolidated management and good documentation but very complex and difficult to operate
It is not user-friendly, and it is very difficult to operate. You have to have a deep understanding of the technical details of the infrastructure to implement it. When you compare it with VMware, it is totally different because the graphical user interface is not that easy to understand. It is not intuitive. To use it, you have to read a lot of documentation and even understand what is going on behind the solution. It is not for someone who has a little bit of knowledge. Currently, it is too complex. I need something that is easy to implement. It should have a basic configuration as well as a complex configuration.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is that you can manage the whole cluster from the traffic interconnect."
"The technical support has been helpful. We are always able to get through to the right person."
"Cisco HyperFlex is helping us to put everything in centrally so that we can manage in one place."
"Overall, the solution is extremely easy, flexible and secure."
"The scalability of the product is quite good overall - as long as you plan correctly from the outset."
"It has reduced the time it takes to put the servers in production by half the time."
"The speed, storage, and management are the most valuable features."
"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."
"I like that you can add other types of services."
"The most useful feature is the solution's automation in terms of how we are able to spin up a certain workload in real-time when we are doing R&D."
"Both the scalability and stability of this solution are excellent."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The size of the hardware is what we need because it is very good for small configurations."
"The consolidation of the management in one control point is the most valuable. The whole infrastructure management is consolidated in just one console point. The documentation is also pretty good."
 

Cons

"Lacks some integration and documentation could be improved."
"The primary improvements should be made in the cluster storage controller VMs so that they don't break the upgrade process."
"This solution is lacking in replication and backup abilities that I would like to see in a future release similar to HPE SimpliVity."
"The setup was complex, especially since we usually do all the planning, sizing, and workflows before integration."
"Cisco is quite expensive but not in the initial first buy."
"One aspect that really needs to be looked at, is to fix the bugs issue."
"Cisco should combine its features with its prices."
"I would like it to be easier to manage the server, create VMs, and manage the VMs on the client."
"It should be more user-friendly, in my opinion."
"The licensing policy needs to be improved. They have a licensing policy based on the number of CPU sockets. Nowadays what has happened is that the license they are trying to move is based on the number of CPU cores. With the advancement in technology there are now more cores in a single CPU. It's been very challenging in terms of managing the license around everything. Today we have a processor with 24 and 32 cores on the same physical CPU."
"The cloud deployment could be improved."
"This product is not so stable. Maybe it is just not mature enough in its development."
"It is not user-friendly, and it is very difficult to operate. You have to have a deep understanding of the technical details of the infrastructure to implement it. When you compare it with VMware, it is totally different because the graphical user interface is not that easy to understand. It is not intuitive. To use it, you have to read a lot of documentation and even understand what is going on behind the solution. It is not for someone who has a little bit of knowledge. Currently, it is too complex. I need something that is easy to implement. It should have a basic configuration as well as a complex configuration."
"The main issue is the initial investment. It is an expensive product, and it should be cheaper. It should also be easier to use and manage. The professional service for this solution is quite complex and expensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our licensing is Hybrid. We have all of our applications for billing and outage management through this."
"Our licensing costs are large, but it is combined between all of the Cisco products that we have."
"We negotiated with Cisco and we got some price benefit from that."
"There is a recurring cost for the VMware license and the HyperFlex licenses."
"Comparable solutions with switches, storage, and services are cheaper than HyperFlex. It should be cheaper."
"The price is a bit high. It could be better, but the product is worth the cost."
"Its price is rather fair when compared with other solutions like VxRail, vSAN, and HPE SimpliVity. We got a fair amount of discount from Cisco for Cisco HyperFlex. It is cost-effective. We have renewed storage till next year, and we have already paid the vendor. When we talk about HyperFlex or any HCI solution, storage is the part where we can reduce a lot of costs. At the current moment, we are already using NetApp storage, which did not allow us to go for a full Cisco HyperFlex setup. We are planning to go to a larger scale next year. Then we will be able to see how cost-effective it really is for us."
"For customers in the private sector, this product can have a very high return on investment."
"Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure is an open-sourced, low-cost solution with full features."
"It is quite pricey."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which HCI solutions are best for your needs.
861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Real Estate/Law Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

How do I choose between Cisco Hyperflex HX Series and Nutanix Acropolis AOS?
Cisco HyperFlex HS series vs Nutanix Acropolis AOS Cisco HyperFlex gives extended hyper-convergence functions from core to edge and multi-cloud environments. It helps IT and OT teams deploy hyper...
How does VxRail compare with Cisco HyperFlex HX Series?
VxRail provides stable solutions for technical problems while at the same time not being too expensive for a company to invest in. Even if you are working with a limited budget, this platform offer...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Red Hat HCI, Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure for Virtualization
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BluePearl Veterinary Partners, Ready Pac Foods, Bryant University, Bellevue Group, KPIT Technologies, City Harvest
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, VMware, Nutanix and others in HCI. Updated: July 2025.
861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.