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

"The simplicity of backup and restore directly with VMware is an advantage and the time to backup and restore is reduced."
"Technical support has been very helpful when we have issues."
"Most banks and financial institutions use the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the RBAC, the Role-Based Access Control. In our managed service, we can have different layers of security."
"It allows us to easily take a Snapshot and use it with any backup tools. We can also take Snapshots on the application side. We can also take Snapshots on the application side. If we want to restore an SAP or an Oracle machine, a normal Snapshot won't do it, but we can do so with SnapCenter."
"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."
"The product’s most valuable feature is cloning."
"I like the instant backups and recovery feature that SnapCenter provides within NetApp storage systems."
"The data protection strategy varies on a case-by-case basis, but overall, it's doing well."
"Just knowing that the data is easily recoverable is our ROI. It definitely lowers risk."
"The most valuable feature of Quest Rapid Recovery for our organization is the VM recovery functionality."
"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 very easy to use and very easy to manage. The fact that I can easily recover data is valuable. I don't use it much. The only way I have been using it is that sometimes, people ask to recover the data, which is a very easy process. It takes only a few minutes to get in and get the data from the server."
"The most valuable feature is the disaster recovery process from the data center."
"Definitely, the mount and recovery points are the most valuable, because if someone deletes a file or something, or if something gets corrupted, we can always revert back to an old change because our repository goes about a month back. The ability to roll back files and the ability to roll back servers is really important."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is its ability to back up a physical server to another physical or virtual server."
 

Cons

"My major issue is when I upgrade. I have to touch every last client that I have in SnapCenter, and right now I have 60... They said that in another release that will get better, but right now it's not better and I've had to do this three times."
"The product lags in terms of availability."
"There is one area that needs improvement and that's in the alerting. When you set up your SMTP alerts, it only has - and I don't understand why - the ability to send an anonymous SMTP. It doesn't do basic authentication, which frustrated me for a while until I figured out that I'm not missing something. It's just not there."
"We tend to have a lot of Hyper-V... so now we have two management consoles and we would ideally like to leverage SnapCenter to include Hyper-V."
"The UI, the User Interface, needs to be improved. It's not as clean or modern as it could be."
"The compatibility with other manufacturers, like Oracle and Hyper-V, could be improved. I would like to see it be more compatible with other software."
"Since the solution's initial setup is complex, it should make training documents available in the public space."
"One thing that might be improved is the ease of management."
"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."
"Sometimes, when we have certain batches for Windows, it needs to be restarted. When it's restarted, the service is configured as a delayed start. Sometimes, you need to wait too long until it rights itself, or you have to do it manually."
"The initial setup can be tricky, and if not done right, the whole solution needs to be reinstalled."
"One area where Quest Rapid Recovery has room for improvement is in the handling of snapshots on Hyper-V."
"It's not really Quest's fault, but the only issue that I had during the time when I was doing a lot of our restores is whenever the server reboots, it has to bring all of the repositories back in again, which takes around five to six hours to pull eight terabytes back in again."
"There is room for improvement in customer service and support. I would like to see faster response time."
"In terms of what needs improvement in Quest Rapid Recovery, though the solution is seamless, right now, they are just giving the software which means we'll need to arrange the hardware. If they can combine the appliance and software, that would be a great approach. In the next release of Quest Rapid Recovery, it would be great if they'd add a folder backup feature because only a snapshot backup feature is available at the moment."
"I think the self-paced learning and knowledge base can always be improved so that users can self-service without having to contact either a reseller or Quest. I know there are things that I would have been looking for to try and solve. And the only way I could get there was to actually open a ticket rather than go through self-service through the portal."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's free. The license is included with other NetApp products."
"The product is inexpensive."
"We have a site license, so it comes with the product."
"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 see a financial value with SnapCenter because we don't have to license Commvault, which is pretty expensive."
"The license for SnapCenter was included with the storage array."
"Pricing is very good because if you already have NepApp controllers, then it's included."
"It comes free with the amount of equipment we purchase from NetApp. In terms of pricing, zero is my favorite number."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Its price is okay. It is reasonable in terms of the way it works."
"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."
"I believe the basic license comes with six terabytes, whereas a lot of the other ones are four terabytes. From the price point, it seemed a lot better than the comparative models, such as Datto, Barracuda, and some of the others. I believe Barracuda was about $15,000 for four terabytes, and Quest was around $12,000 for six terabytes. Pricing is based on the period. There is just the maintenance fee that you have to pay annually, or you can pay for a three-year or four-year contract. This includes Premier Support."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
883,011 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Educational Organization
7%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Performing Arts
11%
Comms Service Provider
5%
Financial Services Firm
4%
 

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, Rubrik and others in Backup and Recovery. Updated: February 2026.
883,011 professionals have used our research since 2012.