Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs Azure NetApp Files comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 17, 2024

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

Amazon EFS (Elastic File Sy...
Ranking in Cloud Storage
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
File and Object Storage (8th)
Azure NetApp Files
Ranking in Cloud Storage
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (3rd), Public Cloud Storage Services (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Cloud Storage category, the mindshare of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is 8.4%, down from 10.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Azure NetApp Files is 8.9%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Storage
 

Featured Reviews

MuhammadAzhar Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Auto-scaling capabilities enhance file management while reducing downtime
The most valuable feature of Amazon EFS is its auto-scaling capability. It's really easy to configure EFS by just creating it and running a command to directly configure it with my servers. It supports unlimited use, and charges are applied based on the file usage at the end of the month. The solution offers reduced downtime and increased durability through its auto-scaling features.
We can expand our storage on-the-fly without the need to reprovision
Ease of provisioning: It's very easy to consume the product. We are not doing this manually. We are doing this programmatically, but it's very easy and seamless for us to consume it. It's like any other Azure component. It's very good and well-integrated into the ecosystem of Azure. There is tight integration. We didn't need to learn anything new. It feels like we know everything already, although under the hood, the product is something totally different. However, it seemed very easy for us. It's elastic, so it scales with our demands. We can start small, then with the addition of customer loads, we can expand on-the-fly without the need to reprovision something. The performance is quite good, so it's almost on par with the make of SSD storage. It provides a quick, scalable storage solution. We were looking for a supported solution. We didn't want to experiment. We didn't want to look for open source, though we did look into open source initially before we bumped into NetApp. We figured out that adding yet another unknown into our system was not going to bring us benefit. It would be another problem that we would need to tackle. So, we said, "Okay, let's look for a supported solution," and NetApp was one of them. Then, we turned to NetApp.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The first valuable thing is it is scalable."
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is secure as it is used under VPC."
"Elastic File Systems allow me to share data, provision, and manage capacity and performance in AWS."
"The solution is scalable."
"Elastic File Systems allow me to share data, provision, and manage capacity and performance in AWS."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"Amazon EFS is extremely stable, as it is managed by AWS."
"It has saved a lot of time. Because in the older, conventional hardware system, they need to raise a ticket to go to storage engineering, then storage engineering would increased the size. Now, it's dynamic. You don't have to do anything. This improved the time by more than 50 percent."
"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."
"Using NetApp Files got us out of a really difficult situation quickly, effectively, and at a reasonable cost."
"Since we have NetApp's internally, we use the SnapMirror predominantly for this process in the cloud which is beneficial."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its flexibility."
"I think the easiest part is, when you do a comparison, it is the throughput versus the cost. And it's much easier to set up."
"Its security and ease of use are most valuable."
"Azure NetApp Files has been stable."
 

Cons

"There are challenges related to AWS, such as ensuring proper security measures with IMS code and encryption."
"It should be simplified. There are people who don't have cloud experience. It should be storage that we are able to just connect to."
"Amazon EFS is more costly compared to other storage options available from AWS."
"The initial setup requires prior experience and technical skills."
"The user activity needs to be more connected."
"The deployment is definitely not an easy process."
"Specifically, when it comes to the file system for the learning system, we encountered performance issues with both Azure and AWS."
"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."
"The solution needs to improve it's ABS environment."
"The deployment process is somewhat complex compared to other storage solutions."
"We would like for the files which are coming in that we can version them. So, if a file is accidentally deleted, there should have a recycle bin option where we can go back, and at least once, clean it up."
"I don’t like the solution’s configuration and support."
"Azure NetApp Files could improve by being more diverse to integrate better with other solutions, such as Splunk and the on-premise version. There are some use cases that are not covered natively by Azure. It is not the best solution because it is not external from the cloud which for me is the best type of solution."
"This solution would be improved with more innovation."
"Reserved Instances for Azure NetApp Files would improve more use cases, making them more valuable in Azure as the cost would be reduced."
"We were looking for a clustered solution that has over-complicated things because we had it in AWS, which is Amazon. There was a solution for clustered NetApp. That meant there would be two NetApps that were not clustered because there was no solution for a cluster. We would like there to be an HA cluster solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product charges are based on the amount of data stored."
"The product's price depends on the services and the size and capacity at which it is used in a business environment."
"The solution's price is mid-ranged."
"It has flexible pricing. You are charged based on your storage."
"Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) offers a pay-as-you-go model, so whenever you use its services, you need to pay."
"The main challenge with EFS is its cost, which is slightly higher compared to EBS or S3. For one GB or ten GB of data, S3 is much cheaper. EFS could cost around $30 to $50 per month for similar usage."
"I would rate the pricing 7 out of 10."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."
"The price of Azure NetApp Files could be better."
"We are currently on a pay-as-you-go model with the storage that we use."
"Our pricing has not been determined because we are still waiting on additional features."
"This solution is very expensive compared to the alternatives."
"Its price is double the price of the premium disks, which is the main reason why customers don't go for this solution in the end."
"The pricing depends on your scaling and consumption."
"In the cloud, pricing depends on how you manage it. It's not necessarily cheap, but it's all about optimizing charges and showing the cost back. So, it's more about managing the expenses rather than being inherently expensive or cheap."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Storage solutions are best for your needs.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
32%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which file storage system is better - Amazon EFS (elastic file storage) or Azure File Storage?
Amazon EFS is easy to set up: you can use the AWS management console, API, or command-line. Amazon EFS can grow to petabytes and deliver consistent low latencies and high levels of throughput. This...
What do you like most about Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)?
The product's initial setup phase is easy, as per the configurations.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)?
Amazon EFS is more costly compared to other storage options available from AWS.
How does Azure NetApp Files compare to NetApp ONTAP?
Azure NetApp Files is a Microsoft Azure file storage service built on NetApp technology. The platform combines the file capabilities of Azure and NetApp to move critical file-based applications to ...
What do you like most about Azure NetApp Files?
The availability is good, meaning downtime or network issues rarely occur. The system also offers flexibility, allowing for increases in data volume, IOPS, and other capabilities without requiring ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure NetApp Files?
The solution's competitors like Oracle or Amazon are not cheap either. I think we're paying two million dollars for Azure NetApp Files. On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is exp...
 

Also Known As

No data available
NetApp ANF, ANF
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Arcesium, Atlassian, Seeking Alpha, Zend
SAP, Restaurant Magic
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Azure NetApp Files and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.