Amazon FSx vs Azure NetApp Files comparison

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and NetApp are both solutions in the Cloud Storage category. Amazon Web Services (AWS) is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.5, while NetApp is ranked #8 with an average rating of 7.2. Additionally, 100% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of NetApp users who would recommend it.

Amazon FSx

Read 2 Amazon FSx reviews

198 Views
163 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Azure NetApp Files

Read 16 Azure NetApp Files reviews

2,115 Views
1,322 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Amazon FSx

Azure NetApp Files

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Amazon FSx and Azure NetApp Files based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files Report (Updated: November 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files

November 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,053 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Amazon FSx

Ranking in Cloud Storage

14th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

File System Software (6th), File and Object Storage (17th)

Azure NetApp Files

Ranking in Cloud Storage

8th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Migration (3rd), Public Cloud Storage Services (8th)

Featured Reviews

KhaderNawaz

Solution Architect at Virtusa Global

Effortless data recovery through cloud-based storage management and good support on offer

Currently, our use case involves moving shared folders on-premises to FSx for cloud-based storage The use of cloud technology saves time by reducing the need for infrastructure maintenance. It allows for dynamic scaling and efficient resource utilization. FSx operates as an independent service,…

Read full review

Vladislav Malicevic

CTO at Jedox

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We used it for disaster recovery perspective behind a number of resources, like batch services and RDS."

"FSx operates as an independent service, not tied to any server, which eliminates dependencies between applications for storage."

"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."

"You can change it non-disruptively. You can increase the size and decrease the size online, which is a huge benefit compared to Azure disks. It just works seamlessly. You don't need to stop the instances."

"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."

"Since we have NetApp's internally, we use the SnapMirror predominantly for this process in the cloud which is beneficial."

"We use Azure NetApp Files mainly for backup."

"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 downtime, which is a strong point. Based on the money spent, we can get performance improvements and high availability."

"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."

"I like the SnapMirror feature in Azure NetApp Files. It helps me create backups with snapshots and makes data recovery and compression."

More Azure NetApp Files pros

Cons

"I've been facing a challenge when doing a failover from FSx side. AWS console does not refresh within a half hour."

"A direct FTP feature would be beneficial instead of relying on transmission services."

"The solution needs to improve it's ABS environment."

"The main area for improvement is in the support ticket system. Since it's a SaaS platform, support tickets are managed by Microsoft or NetApp backend. This can sometimes lead to cross-functional challenges for organizations."

"I would like to see multi-zone redundancy so that I don't have to worry about it. I just back up my data to that one SMB share and I know that it's replicated to a different region."

"Azure NetApp Files is expensive."

"We would like to have backup functionality built-in so that we don't run into the issue where the replication process makes a copy of the corrupted data."

"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."

"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."

"The pricing definitely needs to be improved."

More Azure NetApp Files cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"The licensing fees for this solution vary, ranging from a single shelf to a full suite."

"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."

"This solution is very expensive compared to the alternatives."

"The performance has improved by about 30 percent."

"The price of Azure NetApp Files could be better."

"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."

"NetApp is a premium offering, so it's not a cheap product, but it is well-priced. It combines a couple of properties which customers like us are willing to pay. Could it be cheaper? Yes, but if you combine fully supported, fully managed, easily provisioned, scalable, and quick all in one product, it's a good selling point. You can ask a lot of money for all these. If you have a use case like we do, it's a perfect match. It's like the Porsche of storage solutions in the cloud. It is totally worth the cost."

"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."

More Azure NetApp Files pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Storage solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

19%

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Retailer

Educational Organization

33%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon FSx?

A direct FTP feature would be beneficial instead of relying on transmission services. Although I haven't worked extensively with FSx, there seems to be room for more improvement.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Amazon FSx?

Currently, our use case involves moving shared folders on-premises to FSx for cloud-based storage.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Amazon FSx?

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

WekaFS vs Amazon FSx

Compared 44% of the time

Nasuni vs Amazon FSx

Compared 10% of the time

Oracle ZFS vs Amazon FSx

Compared 9% of the time

Pure Storage FlashBlade vs Amazon FSx

Compared 9% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Amazon FSx

Compared 8% of the time

More Amazon FSx Competitors

Microsoft Azure File Storage vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 42% of the time

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 23% of the time

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 11% of the time

Nasuni vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 8% of the time

NetApp ONTAP vs Azure NetApp Files

Compared 4% of the time

More Azure NetApp Files Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cloud Storage

December 2024

Download Amazon FSx product report

Buyer's Guide

Azure NetApp Files

December 2024

Download Azure NetApp Files product report

Also Known As

Amazon FSx for Windows File Server, Amazon FSx for Lustre

NetApp ANF, ANF

Learn More

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

NetApp

Overview

Amazon FSx makes it easy and cost effective to launch and run popular file systems. With Amazon FSx, you can leverage the rich feature sets and fast performance of widely-used open source and commercially-licensed file systems, while avoiding time-consuming administrative tasks like hardware provisioning, software configuration, patching, and backups. It provides cost-efficient capacity and high levels of reliability, and it integrates with other AWS services so that you can manage and use the file systems in cloud-native ways.

Amazon FSx provides you with two file systems to choose from: Amazon FSx for Windows File Server for enterprise workloads and Amazon FSx for Lustre for high-performance workloads.

Azure NetApp Files is designed for unstructured data, virtualized SAP systems, SQL backups, NFS and CIFS protocols, Azure Virtual Desktop storage, and optimizing file share services. It supports high performance and networking integration in Microsoft Azure.

Azure NetApp Files offers features such as SnapMirror for data protection, rapid provisioning, elastic scaling, and ultra-fast SQL backup and restore. It provides a seamless experience with fast snapshotting, high availability, security, and ease of setup. Users benefit from significant performance improvements and the ability to manage substantial workload migrations effortlessly. This service is ideal for environments like Azure Kubernetes Service and cloud EPM platforms, where speed, flexibility, and performance are crucial.

What are the key features?

Flexibility: Adaptable to diverse storage needs.
Rapid response time: Ensures quick data access and operations.
SnapMirror: Provides replication and data protection.
SEC compliance: SnapLock ensures regulatory adherence.
Ultra-fast SQL backup: Quicker backup and restore operations.
Elastic scaling: Easily adjusts resources based on demand.
Fast snapshotting: Enables quick data snapshots.
High availability: Ensures consistent data access.
Security: Robust measures for data protection.

What are the expected benefits and ROI?

Performance: Notable improvement in processing speeds.
Simplicity of setup: Easy deployment and configuration.
Scalable management: Handles significant workload migrations with ease.
Cost efficiency: Allows comparing throughput versus cost effectively.

Azure NetApp Files is implemented in various industries requiring robust file storage solutions, from educational environments where performance boosts are critical to businesses leveraging Azure Kubernetes Service for containerized applications. It supports high-demand environments, optimizing data management and improving efficiency.

Sample Customers

Neiman Marcus, T Mobile, Docxellent, Matrix, Lyell

SAP, Restaurant Magic

Buyer's Guide

Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files

November 2024

Free Report: Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files

Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Amazon FSx vs. Azure NetApp Files report.

See our list of best Cloud Storage vendors.

We monitor all Cloud Storage 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.