Amazon Elastic File System (EFS) vs. IBM Power Virtual Server

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)
Score 7.2 out of 10
N/A
The Amazon Elastic File System (EFS) provides a simple, scalable, elastic file system for Linux-based workloads for use with AWS Cloud services and on-premises resources.
$0.04
per GB
IBM Power Virtual Server
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
IBM presents their Power Systems Virtual Server as a scalable, cost-effective way to run IBM AIX, IBM i and Linux workloads​.N/A
Pricing
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)IBM Power Virtual Server
Editions & Modules
US East & West Region
$0.043
per month per GB (One zone)
Europe (Ireland) Region
$0.046
per month per GB (One zone)
Asia Pacific & Canada Region
$0.047
per month per GB (One zone)
Africa (Cape Town) Region
$0.054
per month per GB (One zone)
AWS GovCloud (US-East)
$0.056
per month per GB (One zone)
US East & West Region
$0.08
per month per GB (Standard)
Asia Pacific & Canada Region
$0.09
per month per GB (Standard)
Europe (Ireland) Region
$0.09
per month per GB (Standard)
Africa (Cape Town) Region
$0.10
per month per GB (Standard)
AWS GovCloud (US-East)
$0.11
per month per GB (Standard)
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)IBM Power Virtual Server
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoYes
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeOptional
Additional DetailsThere is no minimum fee or setup charge. You pay only for the storage you use, for read and write access to data stored in Infrequent Access storage classes, and for any provisioned throughput. Amazon EFS offers four storage classes: two standard storage classes, including Amazon EFS Standard and Amazon EFS Standard-Infrequent Access (EFS Standard-IA), and two One Zone storage classes, including Amazon EFS One Zone and Amazon EFS One Zone-Infrequent Access
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)IBM Power Virtual Server
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)IBM Power Virtual Server
Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS)
Comparison of Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) features of Product A and Product B
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)
8.8
5 Ratings
8% above category average
IBM Power Virtual Server
8.4
188 Ratings
3% above category average
Service-level Agreement (SLA) uptime10.05 Ratings8.8187 Ratings
Dynamic scaling10.05 Ratings8.3186 Ratings
Elastic load balancing10.04 Ratings8.3183 Ratings
Pre-configured templates4.04 Ratings7.9182 Ratings
Monitoring tools8.55 Ratings9.0185 Ratings
Pre-defined machine images7.03 Ratings8.5183 Ratings
Operating system support9.55 Ratings8.4185 Ratings
Security controls10.05 Ratings8.8184 Ratings
Automation10.04 Ratings7.9161 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)IBM Power Virtual Server
Small Businesses
Akamai Cloud Computing
Akamai Cloud Computing
Score 9.0 out of 10
Akamai Cloud Computing
Akamai Cloud Computing
Score 9.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.1 out of 10
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.1 out of 10
Enterprises
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.1 out of 10
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)IBM Power Virtual Server
Likelihood to Recommend
7.5
(5 ratings)
8.5
(188 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
9.6
(4 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
2.0
(3 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
8.0
(1 ratings)
8.1
(2 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Configurability
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
Ease of integration
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Vendor post-sale
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)IBM Power Virtual Server
Likelihood to Recommend
Amazon AWS
While the idea is to utilize it enterprise wide; it sometimes doesn't work well in smaller applications and that causes slowdowns and impacts productivity. Also when evaluating EFS versus EBS - one needs to look at cost as EFS is a lot more expensive to implement and run so you need to weigh cost benefits of both systems and choose the best for you.
Read full review
IBM
Due to its reliability, it is well-suited for mission-critical applications. It is also well suited for running multiple applications on a single server and fully utilizing the server's full capacity. However, it is not well suited for servers that require dedicated IO resources.
Read full review
Pros
Amazon AWS
  • This is very easy to setup and has a great performance.
  • As per the name, Elastic grows as your data grows.
  • We can run multiple EC2 instances.
Read full review
IBM
  • It is easy to segregate test environment with production environment
  • security and compliance
  • IBM server are scalable with - with increase in data it can dynamically allocate the resources with saves the company cost
  • it is very convenient to use with help of its hardware management console and integrated virtualization manager.
  • The best part it , it support our legacy system.
Read full review
Cons
Amazon AWS
  • For early age start it would be costly
  • Not necessary for small scale system, but very beneficial for system which have high TPS and huge user base
Read full review
IBM
  • Having a wider selection of software to work with would be welcome.
  • Training and education is daunting at first and could be simplified.
  • Much of the automation is wonderful after it is set up but getting started has a steep learning curve.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
IBM
At the moment we are 100% satisfied with the performance and our support team is well used to the process involved. So unless we have some major issues in adopting, we are sure to be with IBM itself.
Read full review
Usability
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
IBM
Power Systems Virtual Server on IBM Cloud for IBMi's overall usability is good, but it can be difficult for new users, some learning is needed, but there are tonns of online documentation.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
IBM
Very easy to use.
Read full review
Performance
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
IBM
Easy to use.
Read full review
Support Rating
Amazon AWS
The documentation is sufficient for setting up and it is basic NFS for mounting so not much support is required. I have not had any issues to warrant a request with AWS support.
Read full review
IBM
As with most IBM products the ongoing support for IBM Power Virtual Server is solid and consistent. IBM provides a clear roadmap for receiving support of their products. Both voice and online response is offered. It is obvious that IBM has the internal systems and culture to maintain support functions. This starts from the initial support call to the problem analysis and continues through the problem resolution. Documentation and communication are consistent within this process.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
IBM
It is economic.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Amazon AWS
EFS is easier to configure, no need for Active Directory.
Read full review
IBM
They both have their own ups and downs and it totally depends on the team which suits them best. IBM Power Virtual Server has Performance, Scalability, Reliability and Availability, Compatibility, and Good Vendor Support. The specific use case and workload requirements played a significant role. Some workloads may benefit from IBM Power Systems' architecture, while others may perform equally well on alternative platforms.
Read full review
Scalability
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
IBM
It is efficient.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Amazon AWS
  • Cost is always a paramount issue when looking at ROI
  • It is fast and if that's what you need for your implementation - you probably will not find a better solution
  • Expertise in EFS is sometimes hard to come by so it's best to look at your employee's ability to grasp this technology. Otherwise, it's a pretty steep learning curve.
Read full review
IBM
  • We have had a return on investment of 30%.
  • There have also been 80% fewer application crashes due to a lack of resources that previously ran on the X86 platform.
  • Administration management has been simplified and staff can dedicate themselves to the development of applications, instead of providing support to users when the applications do not respond efficiently, this made staff 45% more productive.
Read full review
ScreenShots