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

Google Kubernetes Engine vs Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 13, 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

Google Kubernetes Engine
Ranking in Container Management
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE
Ranking in Container Management
11th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Container Monitoring (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Container Management category, the mindshare of Google Kubernetes Engine is 2.2%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE is 10.0%, up from 5.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Management
 

Featured Reviews

Abhilash Gopidas - PeerSpot reviewer
The auto-scaling feature helps during peak hours, but the support is not great
The product has no downtime. Automated scaling is a valuable feature. During peak hours, the datasets are on a higher volume. We need scaling in place. Otherwise, there's a degradation in the performance. We might sometimes miss data, or there will be no data sync between systems. Auto-scaling helps deal with performance needs during peak hours. There's no lag time for processing data.
StefanMotsch - PeerSpot reviewer
Has a straightforward setup process, but the scalability needs improvement
NKE could benefit from additional features that support more advanced Kubernetes functionalities and configurations. Improvements in scalability for larger, multi-tenant environments and enhanced capabilities for managing high-performance computing needs would be advantageous. For AI applications, incorporating tools to support initial phases, such as data ingestion and model training, would enhance its utility.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution simplified deployment, making it more automated. Previously, Docker required manual configuration, often done by developers on their computers. However, with Google Kubernetes Engine, automation extends to configuration, deployment, scalability, and viability, primarily originating from Docker rather than Kubernetes. Its most valuable feature is the ease of configuration."
"Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) takes care of managing Kubernetes, including the main control plane. It also offers solutions for monitoring resources and handling external traffic, which is essential for us. Being a cloud-native solution, it relieves us from worrying about these operational aspects."
"The most valuable aspect of Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) is its managed nature, which significantly reduces the burden on our platform team."
"The initial setup process is simpler and more user-friendly than other cloud providers."
"I highly recommend it to others due to its comprehensive features and cost-effectiveness for various company sizes."
"Google Kubernetes Engine's most valuable feature is container deployment."
"The logs are important for detecting problems in our clusters."
"The most beneficial feature is the ability to separate each project and manage permissions more effectively."
"The platform is valuable due to its ease of use and quick deployment capabilities."
"The solution provides no downtime features. If we face issues, we create a new port, deploy it there, and then drop the existing one. This way, we avoid NKE downtime on our website."
"We can add some add-ons and plugins to the product if we need to."
"We can do a lot of provisioning."
"The product integrates well with our infrastructure."
"The solution is embedded in the hypervisor and there are no deployment costs."
"The technical support is excellent."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
 

Cons

"The pricing could be more competitive. It should be cheaper."
"There are some security issues, but it might just be because we are not up to speed yet as much as we should be and so we haven't found it in the documentation yet. That's why I don't want to confuse this. Still, it could be a little bit easier to understand and implement."
"The primary area for improvement would be the complexity involved when working with Google Kubernetes Engine, especially when using Terraform."
"It needs to support load balancing."
"The tool's configuration features need improvement."
"Our critique is that we have to do too much work to get the cluster production-ready."
"t is not very stable."
"Log observability could be made easier so someone from high school can use it without having technological expertise."
"We need a backup of production clusters."
"The product lacks some virtualization capabilities, making it an area for improvement where the solution can focus on providing users with more virtualization capabilities related to disk systems."
"I have issues with the product's interoperability."
"GUI lacks sufficient information to help with understanding the installation and process."
"Areas for improvement in Nutanix Kubernetes Engine (NKE) include upgrading management capabilities and enhancing the user interface for improved usability."
"NKE could benefit from additional features that support more advanced Kubernetes functionalities and configurations."
"One major issue we faced was that appliances couldn't migrate from VMware to the tool. However, this seems to be a common problem across platforms. We've seen the same issue when migrating from VMware to RHV or other solutions. It's not specifically a Nutanix problem but rather an issue migrating appliances from one VM infrastructure to another. Some kernel-level and storage-level issues impact this process."
"I would like to have more nodes for availability and storage."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is a bit expensive compared to some other products, but it's acceptable."
"The product is a little bit expensive."
"The pricing for GKE is dependent on the type of machine or virtual machine (VM) that is selected for the nodes in the cluster. There is a degree of flexibility in choosing the specifications of the machine, such as the number of CPUs, GPUs, and so on. Google provides a variety of options, allowing the user to create the desired cluster composition. However, the cost can be quite steep when it comes to regional clusters, which are necessary for high availability and failover. This redundancy is crucial for businesses and is required to handle an increase in requests in case of any issues in one region, such as jumping to a different region in case of a failure in the Toronto region. While it may be tempting to choose the cheapest type of machines, this may result in a limited capacity and user numbers, requiring over-provisioning to handle additional requests, such as those for a web application."
"We are planning to use external support, and hire a commercial partner for it."
"The price for Google Kubernetes Engine could be lower - I'd rate its pricing at three out of five."
"This is an open source solution, so there is no pricing or licensing."
"I rate the product's price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price. The product is competitively priced."
"Currently, it costs around $1000 per month which sorted our deployment. So once we get more clients, having a huge suffix, costs can go up."
"While deploying Kubernetes clusters on Nutanix is cost-effective, there may be additional costs for remote branch offices where Kubernetes is less common."
"I rate the product price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"The platform is averagely priced. I rate the pricing as four out of ten."
"The product's licenses are included in the software version deployed in our data center."
"I rate NKE's pricing a six out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Management solutions are best for your needs.
837,501 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
8%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google Kubernetes Engine?
For pricing, Google is considered cheaper compared to AWS, making it suitable for smaller to medium companies concerning cost. I would rate the cost around four out of ten, where ten is the higher ...
What needs improvement with Google Kubernetes Engine?
The management UI could be improved. When looking at the web interface, it feels kind of slow due to the many features involved. The interface could definitely be faster.
What do you like most about Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE?
The most valuable features of the Nutanix Kubernetes Engine (NKE) are its simplicity and efficiency during the initial cluster creation phase.
What needs improvement with Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE?
One major issue we faced was that appliances couldn't migrate from VMware to the tool. However, this seems to be a common problem across platforms. We've seen the same issue when migrating from VMw...
What is your primary use case for Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE?
We utilize NKE to create these clusters, configuring components to meet specific business requirements.
 

Also Known As

GKE
Nutanix Karbon
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Philips Lighting, Alpha Vertex, GroupBy, BQ
JetBlue, International Speedway Corporation, SAIC Volkswagen
Find out what your peers are saying about Google Kubernetes Engine vs. Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
837,501 professionals have used our research since 2012.