Cisco HyperFlex vs. FlexPod

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco HyperFlex
Score 7.7 out of 10
N/A
Cisco HyperFlex Systems is a hyper-converged infrastructure product, based on technology acquired with SpringPath (acquired September 2017).N/A
FlexPod
Score 9.4 out of 10
N/A
FlexPod is a converged infrastructure option developed by NetApp and Cisco. FlexPod is available in streamlined and simplified Express version, and the FlexPod Datacenter edition for enterprise private clouds, VDI, scale-out infrastructure, or software defined data centers.N/A
Pricing
Cisco HyperFlexFlexPod
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco HyperFlexFlexPod
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco HyperFlexFlexPod
Considered Both Products
Cisco HyperFlex

No answer on this topic

FlexPod
Chose FlexPod
I have made use of Smartstack, vBlock and Flashstack, as well as other mixes of storage and virtualization hosts, and FlexPod is probably still my favorite. While something like a Nimble Smartstack or Pure Flashstack is easier to maintain, I love the in depth information and …
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
Cisco HyperFlexFlexPod
Small Businesses
StarWind HCA
StarWind HCA
Score 9.6 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
StarWind HCA
StarWind HCA
Score 9.6 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Enterprises
Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure
Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure
Score 9.0 out of 10

No answers on this topic

All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco HyperFlexFlexPod
Likelihood to Recommend
8.6
(28 ratings)
9.5
(2 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.1
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.6
(27 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco HyperFlexFlexPod
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco
Smaller sites that would benefit from a cluster of 2-5 nodes. Not saying that it can't scale above that, but I find HyperFlex a great solution for those sites. A simple 3-node edge cluster can provide a huge amount of resources and redundancy. It's also really easy to scale the environment to meet growth requirements.
Read full review
Cisco + NetApp
FlexPod is great for mid to large size companies, where the flexibility and depth of a traditional SAN and high performance servers is required. For smaller companies, it might make more sense to go with a hyper converged solution such as Hyperflex or Nutanix (both of which can still run on Cisco UCS servers, but would not be making use of Netapp storage), to meet the requirements in a smaller footprint.
Read full review
Pros
Cisco
  • UCS manager in HX is truly helping us in doing one touch firmware upgrades. Scaling of HX cluster (in few minutes) is too seamlessly due to service profiles.
  • HX does not hold you back by creating a single data store unlike other HCI products. With HX, you can create multiple data stores and allocate those to desired services. This help logically separate the install base on HX and removes confusion for the admins too.
  • We run high IOPs workload on HX, and we never felt latency issues due to the Cisco backbone (as you get FI as a TOR switch and options to choose 10G or 40G speeds).
  • With HX you truly enjoy a single window support from Cisco including for the top of the rack switch (FI in HX case). In other HCI infra, you certainly have to bank on to network switch vendor for support and bring HCI and switch vendor at one pane for troubleshooting latency related issues.
  • While we increased our footprint on HX, we didn't added additional administrators to support the landscape. This was possible because of the simplicity in managing HX clusters.
  • With HX we had setup stretched cluster between two near site data centres. This is a unique proposition in HX (we have 2 nodes in each data centre) and data centre failover works absolutely seamless.
Read full review
Cisco + NetApp
  • Single Pane of Glass Server Administration.
  • Ease of firmware upgrades.
  • Incredible support when you have an issue. The Cisco/NetApp/VMware FlexPod support teams work together and drive your issues down to the root cause.
Read full review
Cons
Cisco
  • there is the problem with starting cluster where there are not outside DNS and NTP services so we need to workaround this with additional storage or hosting it on the local storage.. many clusters has internal DNS/NTP services not available from outside and they need to be hosted on the HX
  • there is not RBAC or user mgmt on the CVMs so it is difficult to not add full permission for the people responsible for just shutdown and power on the cluster
  • native snapshots support with ibm backup products
  • running from not the only last snapshot in all use cases
Read full review
Cisco + NetApp
  • KVM control of the blades still requires Java. Avocent is using HTML5 now, and it would be nice if the KVM console for these UCS blades could too.
  • Price - Like any Cisco product, there are cheaper options. They aren't nearly as fully featured, but at times, it would be nice if UCS could be a bit cheaper.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Cisco
We are doing it in the current moment. The platform expansion will be twofold.
Read full review
Cisco + NetApp
No answers on this topic
Usability
Cisco
Everything is fine if you work as a user of the system. Difficulties in fine tuning the system.
Read full review
Cisco + NetApp
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Cisco
More documentation is available now than when the product initially came out (which was an issue early on). Because it only supports UCS hardware, I think it does help with support issues. Nutanix has to support much more hardware. At the same time, you're dealing with the Cisco TAC, which can be mixed at times.
Read full review
Cisco + NetApp
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
Cisco
Fast, powerful, flexible.
Read full review
Cisco + NetApp
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Cisco
HyperFlex is built on top of Cisco UCS infrastructure, which allows us to manage other non-HX servers attached to the same UCS environment. This allows us to tie everything together via Intersight and see all of the servers in our data centers. Other platforms don't really have a comparable offering.
Read full review
Cisco + NetApp
Being a Cisco shop already it was a natural fit to go with a solution based on their technology. Then add in VMware which we are were already using - that was two out of the three for the FlexPod. Then factor in NetApp's de-duplication technology and flexibility in configuration and options and it's a match made in heaven. Not to say we haven't had some stumbles and some issues but it works and it works well.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Cisco
  • The simplified management makes it easier to operate and prevents mistakes.
  • Guided installation using the installer VM means you don't have to configure every component by hand. Improves deployment speed and lowers the risk of configuration issues.
  • Performance increase of 40-90% compared to our previous compute/storage cluster.
Read full review
Cisco + NetApp
  • FlexPod has allowed our team to be extremely quick to resopnd to new VM build requests. The amount of RAM, CPU and backplane offered by B series blades allows us to go with very high VM density. The quick deployment of service profile templates also means that when we have to add new hosts, it is done quicker.
  • FlexPod and the service profile portability (along with VMware) has allowed for full upgrades and migrations from M1/M2 series hardware to M4 hardware without any downtime or outages to the clients. Blades can be moved into new chassis, or service profiles moved to new generation blades, with no impact to the customers' ability to work.
Read full review
ScreenShots