Cisco HyperFlex vs. NetApp FAS Storage Arrays

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
NetApp FAS Storage Arrays
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
NetApp's FAS series systems offers a storage array system for enterprises.N/A
Pricing
Cisco HyperFlexNetApp FAS Storage Arrays
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco HyperFlexNetApp FAS Storage Arrays
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
Best Alternatives
Cisco HyperFlexNetApp FAS Storage Arrays
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
NetApp AFF A-Series
NetApp AFF A-Series
Score 9.6 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco HyperFlexNetApp FAS Storage Arrays
Likelihood to Recommend
8.6
(28 ratings)
8.7
(13 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.1
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(1 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
8.6
(27 ratings)
9.9
(3 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco HyperFlexNetApp FAS Storage Arrays
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
NetApp
It is very easy to use with NFS. Creating new volumes and mounting to servers such as ESXi or Linux is a breeze. It does also support CIFS but it is far less intuitive and requires much more effort. Replicated data is also very simple and robust in the form of SnapVaults or SnapMirrors. This data is either immediately or periodically replicated to a peer FAS in the cluster for retention.
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
NetApp
  • The selling point for NetApp FAS is the application and data protection integration capabilities they provide.
  • We have been able to use NetApp FAS in a variety of use cases with a standard set of management tools.
  • NetApp FAS has evolved over the years from just NAS to also include block protocols. At this time they support almost all industry standard protocols.
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
NetApp
  • Deduplication job runs at certain times and creates a large CPU overhead for the system
  • Management of a volumes, disk groups, LUNs, etc. is a burden to manage and is not efficient with storage capacity
  • Upgrades are complicated and not "non-disruptive"
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Cisco
We are doing it in the current moment. The platform expansion will be twofold.
Read full review
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
NetApp
It does have a really nice and easy to use web interface to do pretty much anything you need with it. It was very simple to configure our volumes and luns and connect them to our VMWare environment using the interface. It has options to rename, shrink, grow, and other things with our luns and volumes. It was nice and easy to read graphs to see where you stand on your storage usage at a glance.
Read full review
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
NetApp
NetApp support in Brazil is managed by its partners. We know in other countries, such as the US and NO, they have support directly from Netapp. We have a very good NetApp partner working with us since the beginning, on both the implementation and daily support. Very few cases needed to be escalated to NetApp support, most of the cases are handled and satisfyingly closed by the partner.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Cisco
Fast, powerful, flexible.
Read full review
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
NetApp
NetApp stacked nicely and gave enterprise-level usability for snapshot-based backups. Our previous RPO was several hours. It was selected prior to me arriving at the company, but It was selected for the hardware refreshes due to its compatibility with several other vendors, like CommVault and VMware.
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
NetApp
  • The speed of file recovery is the biggest positive impact. Recovering from a ransomware attack in minutes is something you can certainly brag about.
  • Integration with products like Exchange and SQL can certainly speed up normal day to day processes. Not just in backup recovery situations either.
  • Redundant paths make migrations and updates very easy with no downtime.
Read full review
ScreenShots