No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

INFINIDAT InfiniBox vs VMware vSAN comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

INFINIDAT InfiniBox
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise SAN (7th)
VMware vSAN
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
234
Ranking in other categories
HCI (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Storage Solutions solutions, they serve different purposes. INFINIDAT InfiniBox is designed for Enterprise SAN and holds a mindshare of 8.4%, up 2.3% compared to last year.
VMware vSAN, on the other hand, focuses on HCI, holds 7.7% mindshare, down 14.0% since last year.
Enterprise SAN Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
INFINIDAT InfiniBox8.4%
Dell PowerStore13.3%
Dell PowerVault11.9%
Other66.4%
Enterprise SAN
HCI Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
VMware vSAN7.7%
VxRail9.6%
Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI)8.9%
Other73.8%
HCI
 

Featured Reviews

GM
Project Deployment at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Good performance, suitable for big data, but the response time could be improved
The primary use case for this product is high-performance storage This product has good performance. It is similar to the Dell PowerMax and Pure Storage FlashArray. The InfiniBox has three active controllers. The response time for read requests can be improved. It is not as good as the solution…
ShyamikaThamel - PeerSpot reviewer
Associate Tech Specialists at Seatrium
Managing mixed RAID workloads has improved data protection and delivers strong performance
VMware vSAN can be improved in certain areas. In cases involving our large data stores with large VMs, we experience some latency, not during normal operation, but during database backup operations. We observed latency due to buffer issues from the top-of-the-rack switches. These issues are mostly network-related because all storage data traffic travels through the network. I have recently used Nutanix, and I observed that Nutanix provides better performance than VMware vSAN due to its data locality features. VMware vSAN is now providing data locality, but we did not use that option. If VMware vSAN provides additional features in the next release, such as the VM balancing feature called DRS on the cluster that VMware previously had, it would be beneficial. With DRS, VMs can move easily from one node to another within the same cluster. Nutanix does not provide that flexibility. When placing a VM on a cluster in Nutanix, the placement uses a balancing component. After that, the VM remains on the same host. If any contention occurs on the CPU or memory side, the VM stays in place until contention happens. If issues occur, the VM migrates to another host while transferring all objects to the same host. This is how their data locality is maintained. When a VM moves to any host, it moves with all VM objects. VMware vSAN does not currently offer this option. If a VM moves to another host, it accesses the disk object through the network, which increases latency. VMware vSAN now offers an option to select data locality, but it does not function like Nutanix. This is why some latency remains. If VMware vSAN can improve this feature, it would be very helpful and VMware would regain its top position.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Its ease of use, smooth integration into the existing environment, quick and easy management, the number of other features available such as snaps, remote replica, etc are valuable features."
"Mostly, their support is also great at reacting to issues but moreover, proactive to prevent issues."
"Overall, this is a good product with good performance."
"The most valuable features are Erasure Coding, Deduplication and Compression, and the advancement in stretching regarding replication."
"If you have storage, separate servers, or any kind of traditional architecture you can convert it to FCI with vSAN, and it is a very simple and easy-to-use solution."
"As long as you don't have a very high IOPS-oriented application, it's a great way to go."
"The management of servers was easy from a central standpoint."
"When we started using vSAN, the speed (performance) of the solution was dramatically higher than the speed of our production systems."
"It's improved the organization overall primarily because the storage is local on the boxes."
"We have greater uptimes, we're not down nearly as much, and we can identify and deal with solutions to problems that we're encountering in those environments."
"In general, VMware customer support is world class."
 

Cons

"InfiniBox, right now, offers only asynchronous replication between two storages."
"The response time for read requests can be improved. It is not as good as the solution from Pure Storage."
"The solution isn’t scalable by itself. It’s a self-contained storage solution, i.e., if you need more space, buy another box."
"Based on my testing, I would like to expand deduplication to include hybrid deployments and not just for all-flash deployments."
"Technical support is no better or worse than what we have seen from other vendors. Usually it works well, but once in a while there are cases that seem to run in circles where you need to get in touch with your account manager and have them escalate the case to get progress."
"It needs to be vanilla. There shouldn't be any custom drivers, any custom anything. It should just be, "Hey, you know what? These drivers are going to work for this version, the next version, and the following version after that." That's the difficulty in this. It takes too much upkeep... The main issue is drivers. Every time we move to a new vSAN version, we're having problems finding the correct drivers for the vendor."
"Compatibility with the previous version, stability, performance, and upgradeability of the solution with the previous version all need to be improved."
"In cases involving our large data stores with large VMs, we experience some latency, not during normal operation, but during database backup operations."
"The integration could be improved. I would like to see integration with other platforms."
"Dedupe in non flash drives can be improved."
"If you don't have vRealize Operations, it would detract from usability of VSAN."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The license covers any feature and also, the future features are already included. It is as easy as a 1, 2 and 3."
"The best features come included without any additional cost."
"It is expensive, but you get what you pay for."
"The solution is relatively expensive compared to similar products."
"Cost-wise, the Nutanix licenses were cheaper, but in terms of the hardware, there was some contention around it. So, in terms of implementation, the way Nutanix was projecting the implementation on their end was that there were a lot of open-source admin platforms. vSAN is a licensed product in VMware, and Nutanix was proposing a KVM solution, which is open source. That's why their pricing was a bit cheaper, but when we were trying to compare it with an enterprise version of their management platform, it boiled down to the VMware vSAN being most effective in the long run."
"The cost is expensive. I purchased two servers. The hardware cost was $19,000. The software cost for these two servers, including the vSAN, was $30,000, which is $11,000 more than the hardware. Then I had to pay another $5,000 for installation and implementation for professional services. In total, it was $54,000 for two vSAN Servers."
"It is expensive. It should be cheaper. It has a perpetual license as well as a subscription-based license, but they are moving towards subscription-based licenses."
"The price is okay."
"Every product is licensed with full support for a certain number of years. The licensing could be cheaper."
"I feel the pricing to be reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise SAN solutions are best for your needs.
912,022 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
11%
Healthcare Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Construction Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business102
Midsize Enterprise58
Large Enterprise135
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What Is The Biggest Difference Between vSAN And VxRail?
While both run on the vSAN technology from VMware, vSAN needs to be deployed on vSAN ready nodes while VxRail is an engineered system. The choice to choose which technology depends on two major fac...
How does HPE Simplivity compare with VMware vSAN?
HPE SimpliVity is a hyper-converged infrastructure solution that is primarily geared to mid-sized companies. We researched VMware vSAN but found HPE was a better option for us. HPE SimpliVity has ...
How does VMware vSAN compare with Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct?
We found VMware’s vSAN was easy to set up, configure, and manage compared to other solutions we considered. It is best suited for small- to medium-sized organizations. It is easy to create load bal...
 

Also Known As

No data available
vSAN
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TriCore Solutions
Read Some Case Studies At Home Cloud CaribCINgroupDiscovery Check out the Rest of our Customer Stories Here
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco and others in Enterprise SAN. Updated: September 2026.
912,022 professionals have used our research since 2012.