We performed a comparison between Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure and SteelFusion based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, VMware, Nutanix and others in HCI."We like their high availability. It reduces the downtime for our entire organization's environment."
"The StarWind Virtual SAN provides a clever and unique solution to the Computing Split Brain problem."
"It provides shared storage to multiple hypervisor hosts. Times had changed, however. StarWind Virtual SAN is the “software replaces hardware” for SAN. We have access control and CCTV systems up and running using Microsoft clustering and shared storage"
"It has allowed us to save a lot of time and money by letting us create a vSAN within a Windows VM on the environment it controls."
"The license price is one of the cheapest in the market."
"Virtual SAN runs on iSCSI, which is free and easy to configure. It's easy to manage from StarWind's GUI console, and it only required a few extra switch ports."
"The ability for us to manage all of our nodes from the same console makes systems administration very easy."
"The most valuable feature is the managed service, which has been an important part of monitoring our critical infrastructure."
"I like that you can add other types of services."
"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."
"Both the scalability and stability of this solution are excellent."
"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."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Sync to Central and edge protection mitigate my risk in our branch offices. All services that need to be local to the user exist on local servers. Users run applications and access data locally while the data is constantly being synced to Central, and protected. If an edge device fails, we can recover quickly."
"I would definitely like to see quite a bit more on the monitoring side of things."
"We have, in rare cases, received conflicting guidance between different support folks within StarWind."
"With data verification, I would like to know how does the solution perform validation of data being synced between two VSANs."
"This solution should be more self-sufficient, running without creating domains or failover clusters."
"If there was one feature I would like to see it would be a built-in subsystem for managing UPS backups shutdown procedures providing a way to initiate VM shutdown on all host servers, shut down the host servers, then put the fault-tolerant mirroring in standby, and finally shut down the StarWind SANs."
"Security on the ISCSI protocol could be improved by adding features like OS-type control access, especially for the data center environment."
"The cluster configuration is time-consuming and tedious."
"It would be good to have a little more access to control certain aspects within the UI."
"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."
"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."
"This product is not so stable. Maybe it is just not mature enough in its development."
"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."
"Setting up disks for use is a multi-step process that could use some refinement. Setting up a core-to-core replication or DR strategy is also cumbersome."
More Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Earn 20 points
Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure is ranked 23rd in HCI while SteelFusion is ranked 27th in HCI. Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure is rated 8.0, while SteelFusion is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure writes "Comes in a small, compact model that does not have any separate management but it is not so stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SteelFusion writes "Sync to Central and edge protection mitigate my risk in our branch offices". Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure is most compared with VxRail, VMware vSAN, Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), whereas SteelFusion is most compared with Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI).
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.