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

NetApp SnapCenter vs Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 26, 2025

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

NetApp SnapCenter
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (42nd)
Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

SaneeshC - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. engineer at Sify Technologies
Has reduced backup time for large workloads and supports smooth workload migration
Role-based access control and multi-factor authentication are security features available in NetApp SnapCenter. The one-time password comes to our multi-factor authentication tool; we work with Cisco Duo, and that OTP is generated through that tool, which we use to access the device. There are different options through which we can migrate workloads without downtime. The user interface is very easy to handle and not complicated. There are multiple features that make NetApp SnapCenter valuable. In case of any job failure, we get an alert over email. For jobs replicating from site A to site B, we know how long it will take to complete that replication. All that information is available in the console, and there aren't any difficulties or objections that need to be improved.
Adam Augustín - PeerSpot reviewer
Country Manager at Prianto Ltd
Granular recovery, replication is good and offers good speed
It is for any kind of company that uses their own servers. From a global perspective, our clients are small-sized companies. All the SMEs, compared to the Slovakian market, are quite small. It's a small market with small companies. They just want to enhance security and follow regulations It's…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's all together managing both storage and backup, which makes it easier for troubleshooting issues and the automation part of it"
"The backup process finishes very quickly."
"While Commvault took two to three days to complete jobs, especially with VM sizes above 8 TB or 10 TB, the same workload configured for NetApp SnapCenter completes in a few seconds."
"The simplicity of backup and restore directly with VMware is an advantage and the time to backup and restore is reduced."
"The way that it interconnects with VMware is really handy, because you can go right into your vSphere client, where you spend a lot of the day anyway, right-click on one of the VMs where you have backups running for however long, and you can restore either some files or restore the entire thing."
"A feature that stands out is cloning databases. If you have a SQL database and it's huge, like one terabyte, the classical SQL way would be to do a backup-restore to create a clone of your database for test purposes. With SnapCenter now, we can clone a database but through the Snapshot technology, which means if you right-click and you click Clone, the one terabyte database is there instantly."
"It's very helpful because SnapCenter is already integrated with VMware Snapshot, so it's very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is that it's centralized. In the old SnapManager days, we had software for each server. Now, with a centralized system, we're able to manage all systems remotely, and all agents remotely, and update them remotely. That's a huge benefit for us."
"The solution offers a 100% guarantee that if it's backed up you will be able to restore it onto any platform you want."
"The data protection strategy varies on a case-by-case basis, but overall, it's doing well."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is its ability to back up a physical server to another physical or virtual server."
"The fact that it can take a snapshot of everything on a server and replicate it on another server in real-time is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is the disaster recovery process from the data center."
"The compression and deduplication features have helped to save on storage costs."
"The local mount utility is most valuable. I do restores fairly regularly. Thankfully, I have not ever lost an entire server that I've had to resurrect, but I certainly have people who erroneously saved over a file or have deleted a file. So, we've done that quite a bit. We still have the DL4000 appliance, and we had, kind of, extrapolated that out over a five-year period. Now, we're in year six, so we had to add storage, which we did as a SAN next to DL4000, but prior to adding in that extra storage, we, here and there, would run into situations where for whatever reason, it would want to be pulling a new base image, and then we would run out of storage. So, we would utilize the archive feature and archive the old data that we want to hang on to, but we don't necessarily need it taking up current data storage. Being able to export out really old data is most valuable to us. Then, we just store that on a NAS that we keep in another building."
"It is more fully integrated with the hypervisor, particularly with VMware solution, and it is simple to create replica sets to our VR site."
 

Cons

"Some of the minor functionalities from SnapManager did not transfer over to SnapCenter. These should be added in future releases."
"The replication feature needs improvement in future releases."
"I would like to see replication support between systems. Right now, it's kind of limited. We manage them separately from the storage system interface, not from SnapCenter. It would be nice if it was integrated into SnapCenter."
"SnapCenter could improve its integration with other backup solutions, such as Veeam."
"The Microsoft environment is its biggest disadvantage due to the central management of all the actions. Because the SnapCenter server is where we deploy everything, it also affects the Microsoft environment, which can cause many difficulties when resolving issues like Windows update problems."
"It needs to support vSphere 6.7."
"I have an issue with SnapCenter because sometimes a VM cannot be backed up... The way SnapCenter works is that it makes a backup of all the VMs and then it removes all the old backups. If one VM cannot be backed up for some reason, it has already created a new backup for all the VMs but it cannot remove the old backups. It ends up creating so many backups in VMware and it will cause a performance problem if the condition is not fixed."
"The GUI is still so-so. I' don't use the GUI that often anymore because it's really slow, refreshing disks, refreshing hosts, and you have to click a lot."
"Rapid Recovery can only backup the machine or disc, but it can't back up from folders, and files, and things like that."
"The initial setup can be tricky, and if not done right, the whole solution needs to be reinstalled."
"It's buggy. That's a big problem. We're arranging to get rid of it. We're going to switch to Veeam."
"You can only take a snapshot from a virtual environment. It should have the ability to take snapshots from both a virtual and physical environment."
"For the most part, it is really good in terms of flexibility and choice of recovery methods. What we found lacking was being able to back up virtual volumes that are clustered. We ran out of luck there. There should be an option for backing up clustered virtual volumes."
"There is room for improvement in customer service and support. I would like to see faster response time."
"The on-premises deployment model shouldn't have a maintenance fee. If there's going to be technical support, they need it to be free or it should be paid on upon adopting the solution."
"When you do a full backup, all of the memory resources on the server are used, which is something that should be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is very good because if you already have NepApp controllers, then it's included."
"The product is inexpensive."
"We see a financial value with SnapCenter because we don't have to license Commvault, which is pretty expensive."
"It comes free with the amount of equipment we purchase from NetApp. In terms of pricing, zero is my favorite number."
"The license for SnapCenter was included with the storage array."
"The licensing is well-designed because it's already included in some packages with NetApp storage. Therefore, for most customers, it's okay as the SnapCenter license is already included in some NetApp bundles."
"We have a site license, so it comes with the product."
"It's free. The license is included with other NetApp products."
"When I purchased the change to the license, it was $1,600. I think that was for changing the license. I don't believe that I had to purchase technical support in a while, so I must've bought maybe for five years, but I don't feel there was a huge cost involved in technical support. Its cost was definitely worth it because we've had a fantastic experience with them."
"It is a little expensive. However, I haven't compared it to other solutions. Being a nonprofit, it is always good to have nonprofit discounts on products."
"I don't think the licensing for the product is very expensive."
"It's very expensive which is why I want to drop it. They charge us per core and we have a six-core server. It's expensive to pay for maintenance charges. I want to switch to something cheaper."
"Licensing fees are based on the amount of data that you want to store, which is related to how many customers you want to cover."
"I'm not aware of the exact cost of Quest Rapid Recovery because I'm from the technical team, but in general, the solution is quite competitive cost-wise."
"Its price is okay. It is reasonable in terms of the way it works."
"The pricing is on the higher end."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
881,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Educational Organization
7%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Performing Arts
11%
Computer Software Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp SnapCenter?
The product team handles the commercial aspects of pricing.
What needs improvement with NetApp SnapCenter?
We have not started much with the automation capability in NetApp SnapCenter. Regarding the integration aspect, I am not certain about its complexity, as this was built by the OEM NetApp team.
What is your primary use case for NetApp SnapCenter?
The major use case for NetApp SnapCenter is that our customer previously used Commvault. For huge VMs with sizes of five TB or 10 TB, taking the file level backup in Commvault took a long time, oft...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Quest Rapid Recovery?
Dell solutions are approximately 30% to 35% more expensive than Veeam.
What is your primary use case for Quest Rapid Recovery?
We have sold some of the products to our customers, mainly to remove competitors like Veeam and also other appliances that do not have the whole package integrated into just one appliance.
 

Also Known As

SnapCenter
Dell AppAssure
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

All for One Steeb AG, Accenture
PRIME aerostructures GmbH, Tamworth Regional Council, Rhondda Housing Association, Stadtwerke Pforzheim GmbH & Co., Guangdong Aiyingdao Childrens Department Store, Nspyre, Tarrant Technology Partners, CloudRunner
Find out what your peers are saying about Veeam Software, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Commvault and others in Backup and Recovery. Updated: January 2026.
881,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.