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

Swarm64 vs Windows Server Failover Clustering comparison

Swarm64 and Microsoft are both solutions in the High Availability Clustering category. Swarm64 is ranked #8, while Microsoft is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.0. Swarm64 holds a 1.6% mindshare in HAC, compared to Microsoft’s 27.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution.
Swarm64
  • 46 Views
  • 21 Comparison Views
Windows Server Failover Clu...
Read 8 Windows Server Failover Clustering reviews
  • 1,265 Views
  • 498 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive Summary
We performed a comparison between Swarm64 and Windows Server Failover Clustering based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, IBM, Veritas and others in High Availability Clustering.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed High Availability Clustering Report (Updated: January 2025).
Buyer's Guide
High Availability Clustering
January 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 832,138 peers since 2012

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

Swarm64
Ranking in High Availability Clustering
8th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Windows Server Failover Clu...
Ranking in High Availability Clustering
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the High Availability Clustering category, the mindshare of Swarm64 is 1.6%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Windows Server Failover Clustering is 27.2%, down from 36.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
High Availability Clustering
 

Featured Reviews

Use Swarm64?
Share your opinion
RK
Easily create clusters supporting geo-redundancy, improves business continuity
The primary use case is increasing the availability of servers (Fail-, Mail-, RDBMS, …) Business continuity is much better, due to the possibility of patching/upgrading systems without interruption of services.   The most valuable feature is the ability to easily create clusters supporting…
Read full review
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which High Availability Clustering solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Windows Server Failover Clustering?
The product is stable.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Windows Server Failover Clustering?
There is no extra charge except a service fee for some professional work. I rate the product’s pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Windows Server Failover Clustering?
The solution uses external storage, while third-party solutions don't use external storage. They're using a mirror to create a partition on each server and synchronize the data in the background. I...
See all answers
 

Comparisons

No data available
Veritas InfoScale Availability vs Windows Server Failover Clustering Logo
Veritas InfoScale Availability vs Windows Server Failover Clustering
Compared 58% of the time
DRBD vs Windows Server Failover Clustering Logo
DRBD vs Windows Server Failover Clustering
Compared 23% of the time
HPE Serviceguard vs Windows Server Failover Clustering Logo
HPE Serviceguard vs Windows Server Failover Clustering
Compared 19% of the time
More Windows Server Failover Clustering Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
High Availability Clustering
January 2025
Swarm64 reportDownload Swarm64 product report
Buyer's Guide
Windows Server Failover Clustering
January 2025
Windows Server Failover Clustering reportDownload Windows Server Failover Clustering product report
 

Overview

Swarm64 seamlessly combines hard- and software into an engineered solution for greater business efficiency and performance. The S64DA is the out of the box solution to add analytical power to your relational databases.
Swarm64
Windows Server Failover Clustering provides infrastructure features that support the high-availability and disaster recovery scenarios of hosted server applications such as Microsoft SQL Server and Microsoft Exchange. If a cluster node or service fails, the services that were hosted on that node can be automatically or manually transferred to another available node in a process known as failover.
Microsoft
 

Sample Customers

Alliance Venture, Target Partners, Investinor
Karl-Franzens-Universit_t Graz, NAV CANADA, Magnachip, ólectricit_ de France, Cambridgeshire Constabulary, Bank Alfalah Ltd., Local Government Association of Queensland
Buyer's Guide
High Availability Clustering
January 2025
Download Free Report
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, IBM, Veritas and others in High Availability Clustering. Updated: January 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our list of best High Availability Clustering vendors.

We monitor all High Availability Clustering 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.