We performed a comparison between NetApp HCI [EOL] and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, Nutanix, VMware and others in HCI.
"It allows me to configure High Availability and failover clustering with some fault tolerance, at a cost point that doesn’t break the bank for a small business budget."
"It eliminates the use of expensive physical shared storage."
"Their support staff is comprised of true experts who can also communicate clearly."
"The features that I found most valuable are ease of use of the software that StarWind offers - with the first setup being a bit painful."
"VSAN works great; it's very easy to install, configure, and manage."
"The support team is available to solve any problem efficiently."
"The ability for us to manage all of our nodes from the same console makes systems administration very easy."
"The most important feature is the ability to experience the loss of one node or one storage device, and not lose the entire cluster."
"The most valuables features of it are the deduplication and the compaction because the ratios are much better than what we normally get on our FAS storage."
"In terms of helping us with storage persistence across private and hybrid clouds, we do store data internally and in Azure. It has allowed us to consolidate a number of workloads, across our old NetApp and a number of our older storage arrays, into a single unit and have that unit also working with Azure."
"The most valuable feature is the convergence."
"HCI definitely improved how flexible we scale, and our entrance into the cloud. The features are very rich, in terms of both avenues. It's helped us flexibly move and shift our workloads around, back and forth."
"It is highly scalable. Their support is also extremely good."
"The ability to size the available space in a way that matches our company's needs is most valuable. For instance, you can decide if you want 80/20, 70/30, or 60/40 space. Redundancy depends on your needs without changing the appliance. You just add space and decide the percentage of space that you need free and the percentage of space that you need for backup. It is all automatic, and you don't have to do anything. You just add space, and the system automatically configures itself with the chosen option."
"When you are doing lifecycles for your equipment, you can just swap out pieces of equipment. We used to do one big iron to another big iron, and that's a major migration hassle. Whereas, with this environment, you can go with small nodes, one at a time, and do a refresh."
"Simple setup and having the storage and compute right on one deployment is the most valuable aspect of this solution. They're able to get set up and ready to go and start having their DevOp team deploy to that environment."
"The flexibility of this system is very good. It's also faster than others, and has skilled technical support who showed more initiative than a competitor, e.g. VMware."
"We like that the size of the box is 1U or 2U only, and all the servers are fit into that box. The ease of operation is there. All the servers and the SAN storage are inside the box."
"Management is simple"
"The snapshots, cloning, and replication are all effective in helping to reduce downtime. It can replicate cluster data for disaster recovery and it provides high availability in case a node or a disk fails."
"It is a good solution and it is easy to work on their platform."
"It is all-in-one. The compute processing, storage, and network altogether make it convenient. We don't have to have different modules for expansion."
"It has a single pane of glass and you don't have to jump around various toolsets."
"The dashboard of Nutanix Acropolis AOS allows for simple management. The dashboard has all the information online about what's going on at any given time."
"I would like to see options for automated notifications of any changes, including, for example, synchronization issues."
"This solution should be more self-sufficient, running without creating domains or failover clusters."
"For improvement, I would like to see how the software determines which networks to use for which purpose. It seems like the naming terminology changes a bit from here to there."
"Perhaps more reporting features on the utilization, usage, and performance of the configured high-availability images and underlying physical disks would be helpful."
"I struggled when bit figuring out how to go about doing the evaluation."
"I'm sure it needs bug fixes..."
"An update caused a syncing issue and it took over a month to resolve it"
"One main thing this product needs to work on is reporting."
"The networking needs improvement."
"I'm not a fan of how they don't log you out properly from some of their web tools for management."
"If you want to have a really dense data center then it's hard to have a big chunk of cabling going through everything."
"In the next version I would like to see bigger GPU types and insurance for including transparency."
"It is easy to install now, but could potentially be even simpler."
"It would be great if they took something like kernel storage and integrated straight into the NetApp as well."
"The price should be lowered. It's a little expensive."
"Its stability is very bad. It has been crashing continuously. In one year, we got three crashes, which is unbelievable for an appliance that is guaranteed for 10 years without any crash."
"NCI's pricing is expensive."
"It does not have good backup feature tools, like having templates or being able to back up every two or three days."
"I would have liked it if Nutanix were a hardware as well as a software platform."
"In the next release of this solution, they could improve by being more competitive with VMware. I would like all third-party solutions to work well with Nutanix Acropolis AOS."
"Nutanix Acropolis AOS could improve by adding some NAS features, similar to the ones that are available in the NetApp solution."
"Usually, there are separate administration teams that take care of servers, but in our organization, servers are usually looked after by the application owner. However, the application owners cannot reinstall the software, OS, and other things. That only aligns with the role of the HCI administrator. If these rights can be provided, it will be very easy."
"The GUI of Nutanix Acropolis AOS could be improved that can be done from the OEM side. It's a very basic stable web browser that they're using. It is not very inclusive."
"It already has the capability to integrate with the major cloud providers but, in an upcoming release, if there is a possibility to have it integrate with other cloud providers like IBM, Alibaba, and other moderate-level cloud providers, that would be good."
More Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
NetApp HCI [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in HCI with 32 reviews while Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) is ranked 2nd in HCI with 194 reviews. NetApp HCI [EOL] is rated 8.0, while Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of NetApp HCI [EOL] writes "Ease of provisioning has allowed us to implement large installations in a very short time frame". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) writes "A powerful solution with easy deployment, upgrades, and management". NetApp HCI [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) is most compared with VMware vSAN, VxRail, HPE SimpliVity, VMware vSphere and Hyper-V.
See our list of best HCI vendors.
We monitor all HCI 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.
NetApp is all flash based on SolidFire Storage . support only VMware
but Nutanix can work with VMware , Hyper-V, Nutanix AHV . Also it can be Hybrid Or All Flash.
If your prime consideration is initial cost then Nutanix with it's ability to provide a non-Flash solution is going to be the answer.
The NetApp HCI solution with separate compute and storage nodes enables scaling in either resource type without needing to include the other. This could reduce TCO over a period of time as requirements change. As the storage is non-virtualised more CPU resources are made available to service user workloads. Native connectivity to hyperscalers and design guides for Private Cloud and an expanding hypervisor landscape.
Ahmed Gomaa, I am sorry, but this is plain wrong.
NetApp HCI supports not only VMware, HyperV, and KVM but has also the unique ability to connect physical hosts without performance penalty or license overhead.
The biggest difference in terms of architecture is that Nutanix needs a Controler Virtual Machine on every host, beeing a legacy HCI architecture. NetApp HCI is references as "disaggregated HCI" as compute nodes serve only compute and storage nodes serve only storage. This allows us to scale compute and storage independently, so no HCI tax wasted.
THE biggest difference in terms of performance is that IOPs are guaranteed in the storage subsystem of NetApp HCI. This is a game-changer for a datacenter as it enables private cloud admins to guarantee SLAs - not just bet on them.
For small environments without the need for VMware Nutanix may be a good choice. But data locality (data needs to reside on the hosts it is read from (kills this solution in my perspective for larger deployments). Even with a prism - making the administration of multiple Nutanix clusters nice and shiny - there are still several clusters in place. With NetApp, HCI there is no need for this. You can consolidate workloads on a massive scale.
The biggest difference in terms of hybrid multi-cloud is that NetApp HCI can speak natively with ONTAP systems via SnapMirror and it integrates directly into all hyperscalers. Ultimately the management of containers can be done within one pane of glass - regardless of where the containers live - OnPrem on HCI, GCS, AWS, Azure.
For me the HCI market is like the automotive market 60 years ago: Germans invented the car, but US-made is cool. Nutanix "invented" HCI, but NetApp wtook it that one step further.
NetApp are enables to NetApp's customers (Already customers) to reuse their legacy hardware while moving the legacy hardware to DR and using SnapMirror techonology for replication while they will use at Primary site using NetApp HCI . It's reducing to need to buy solution for two sites
In the other hand , Nutanix have solutions based Hybrid, those are reduce costs , not every customer is need an All flash solution.
Also , in Nutanix the customer can choose with which hypervisor the would like to run their environment (AHV , VMWARE KVM , Hyper-V etc..)
Wihout any doubt go for nutanix HCI
My only difference is that Nutanix was still developing features with their software BUT what was there fir what we were accessing was very good. I cannot comment on cost as everyone uses their own vendor pools. You need to test both interfaces in your environment or in the vendors test environment and determine if the solution overall will fit your Architecture and Growth plans.
Don't forget the learning curve to adapt and the ongoing maintenance costs. Finally Support... call into the support line and see if their response or professionalism with will for you.
Nothing worse than calling for support and it the company has 9-5 offering lol.
it depends on your needs
NetApp Is Very Good , but expensive as it's All Flash , based on SolidFire Storage . It will support only VMware
but Nutanix can be ALL Flash or Hybrid , also can work with Hyper-v , VMware or Nutanix AHV