Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure Reviews

From a business perspective, we use Sangfor HCI due to its competitive pricing compared to other competitors such as Nutanix. We have reviewed Nutanix as well and found that Sangfor HCI offers similar ease of use. So, in terms of user interface (UI), the experience is more or less the same.

Sangfor HCI has a bundle of security features that are easy to monitor on the HCI dashboard.

Sangfor HCI has room for improvement in terms of integration. So, the integration with Sangfor HCI is not as extensive as in Nutanix. 

Usually, the integration should be straightforward, but with Sangfor HCI, we need to use another API to make the integration happen. That's what happened with our client's project.

In future releases, from a business point of view, Sangfor HCI needs to focus on coding, research, and testing, or involve the R&D department. Most of the time, Sangfor HCI utilizes this technology to follow the BIUI (Business Intelligence User Interface). 

Sometimes it becomes difficult to recall the exact details of a particular feature at the moment. Maybe the next feature should address this issue, so that we don't experience significant delays in the process.

This is our first year using the system.

The solution is stable. I haven't had any hiccups. 

I rate the solution's stability a seven out of ten.

Sangfor HCI is a scalable solution, provided you get the expected point or criteria.

I rate the solution's scalability a seven out of ten. Our clients usually include enterprise businesses. 

The setup process for Sangfor HCI was quite straightforward. We utilize HP servers and have an HP technical assistant on board. Additionally, we have technical support from Sangfor HCI. 

The technical person responsible for deployment is well-versed in the necessary steps and knows what to do and what not to do to deploy the solution.

Considering the huge scale of the deployment, it is crucial to have the right expertise. Although there may be some unique aspects and considerations, overall, I would say the process was relatively straightforward.

We deploy it for our clients.

The solution’s pricing is very competitive. I would say it is cheaper than Nutanix.

I rate the solution pricing a five out of ten, with one being the cheapest and ten being expensive.

I would suggest going for Sangfor HCI because, at the end of the day, HCI depends solely on your client’s or you. It offers the best price if it fits your requirements and you need centralized access to various authentication. The system is good.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

My clients use it on all their virtual machines. These virtual machines contain web applications, and that's Sangfor's main purpose. They have application portals to collect user data, such as registration forms.

Sangfor HCI has a really good GUI. It allows us to monitor the temperature of the server and many other things.

We just deployed Sangfor HCI for our client, and the one problem we faced with Sangfor is preventative maintenance. When we do preventative maintenance, we must upgrade the operating system and run some updates, such as APT updates, because most virtual machines are on Linux. We need to keep the OS updated from time to time. Normally, we do a PM twice a year. Every time we do it, we face challenges. We needed to run an update on the VMs one at a time, which was the biggest challenge we faced. We have over 200 virtual machines, and doing the updates one at a time is tough. There's a window for preventative maintenance with downtime we have to agree on with our client. Normally, the downtime lasts about a day or half a day, depending on the client's requirements, such as the kind of uptime they require. If it's an application that should be highly available all the time, the updates are a huge problem for us. We can't update one virtual machine at a time. We need to update all of them simultaneously. That is why I would rather choose something like Nutanix.

There is a feature to upgrade multiple VMs simultaneously, but it crashes.

I've worked with this solution for around six months.

Sangfor can crash. I rate stability a five out of ten.

When we upgrade virtual machines, there is a feature that allows us to upgrade multiple virtual virtual machines at a time. But the problem is it crashes. The whole server can go down.

Every time the organization needs to expand, we must expand vertically or horizontally, and Sangfor is not cut for it. When it comes to scaling up, Sangfor can't do the job. We use Sangfor for a fixed thing. Let's say we know the organization has only 200 users and won't expand. Then it's okay to use Sangfor. Sangfor is not scalable.

My clients are enterprise-level businesses.

Sangfor is easy to set up. We just have to put the ISO file in our thumb drives. Then, we go to our bare metal server and deploy the ISO. Generally, this is what we do, and it's pretty straightforward.

The deployment time depends on how scalable the organization is. If it's full or fewer than ten servers, we can deploy the solution in a day or a couple of hours if we have experienced engineers. We can deploy the solution with two people.

The solution is affordable.

For preventative maintenance, Sangfor needs us to update one machine at a time. We have over 200 VMs, so the updates affect availability. Because we need to update all the VMs simultaneously, I would prefer something like Nutanix.

From a customer's point of view, Sangfor's instructions are straightforward. If the user is computer literate, they will understand and do it. If instructions are given correctly by me, and users follow them properly, they can fix the problem.

I recommend that prospective users study their client's requirements. They should try to understand what the client wants whether they'll be scaling up in a short period, and users have to consider all those factors before they choose a product like this. Depending on the kind of organization it is and how big it is, if it's a small organization, users can go for Sangfor and save a lot of money. But for big organizations, users must spend some bucks for these hypervisors.

Since there's a lot of room for improvement, I rate Sangfor HCI a six out of ten.

You can get almost all the features of the tool at a low cost. The tool also has built-in backup mechanisms. It also has a physical firewall for internet management which other competitors lack.

We have had issues while integrating VMware with Sangfor HCI. The tool should be also faster in terms of customization.

I have been using the product for five to six years.

The solution is not stable for large enterprises.

The solution is scalable. It can take up to 64 loads.

The tool’s tech support offers us services without extra charges.

Positive

The tool’s setup is easy. You can run it on two nodes. The solution’s deployment is fast and takes around 25-30 minutes to complete. The tool has all the deployment instructions and it is easy for someone with virtualization experience.

The tool’s pricing is better when compared to VMware or Nutanix. The product’s licensing is on a yearly basis.

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good for medium enterprises like regular universities, small banks, and pharmaceutical companies. Sangfor HCI is the best cost-effective solution for universities that have three to four campuses with around 5,000=10,000 students. It is the best campus management system for them.

On-premises

Sangfor is actually the HCI and we are dealing in that.

The solution is very reasonably priced. It was not expensive at all.

The support is very helpful.

Its initial setup is very simple. 

It is a very stable product. It's reliable. 

It's scalable. 

The solution offers good compatibility with other products. 

The migration process could be easier. 

We started selling Sangfor three months ago.

The stability is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

While it's stable, it depends on the implementation. It must be implemented properly. 

It's scalable. We have ten to 15 clients that are on the solution or in process of coming onto the solution. 

Technical support is great. We are very happy with the level of service.

We're also aware of HP, however, their solution is not as good and neither is their support. 

The initial setup was simple and straightforward.  

We have a tech that can handle all aspects of the solution, including implementation. He's been doing it for the last three or four years and understands it quite well. 

Sangfor is cheap and reasonably priced. 

Sangfor has one license and doesn't require any third-party licenses.

The licensing is renewed yearly.

We've implemented it for a couple of companies. There are maybe ten to 15 companies we have with orders still pending. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. It's very cheap and works very well. It's a great solution for companies in Pakistan. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

Public Cloud

We are primarily using this product to store our applications. We are using to host data for us to perform analytics on.

The interface is typical for this type of product. I would rate the user-friendliness an eight out of ten.

Sangfor does not support a SAS configuration, which is something that we would like.

I would like to see support for Kubernetes and Docker.

We have been dealing with Sangfor for less than eight months.

I think that there are issues with scalability because Sangfor consumes a high amount of power. In order to scale using Sangfor, I would also have to scale up the amount of power in my data center.

I am currently not getting enough technical support because of the COVID-19 pandemic. I am looking for direct support, but I don't have it.

The price of Sangfor is cheaper than other competing products.

I am currently looking to replace this solution with something from perhaps Nutanix or Dell. I am still looking for the best solution to use in our next project.

Overall, I think that this is an average product. I am not satisfied with it and do not recommend that others use it.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

On-premises

We primarily use the solution for the AD, Active Directory, as well as file services.

The product is very easy to manage.

The cost is a lot cheaper than VMware.

The solution is stable.

It's scalable.

The initial setup isn't hard.

Technical support is helpful.

I can't recall missing any specific features.

The interface could be a little bit better.

We'd like the solution to offer a built-in firewall.

I've been using the solution for two to three months.

The stability has been good. There are no bugs or glitches. it's reliable. If does crash or freeze. 

We have found that it is possible to scale the product. We have about 200 devices connected to it and haven't had any issues. 

We've dealt with technical support and have found them to be helpful and responsive. We are satisfied with the level of service we get. 

We previously used Hyper-V, which was costlier. We had to change solutions to move towards a newer solution and chose HCI.

We found the solution very simple to set up. It was not overly complex or difficult. The deployment, due to the fact that we spread it out with a few servers, actually took a few weeks. If it's just one server ready to go it might take less than two weeks.

We have a three-person team that can manage the solution. 

We had a third party, a systems integrator, who assisted with the setup process. 

The pricing is pretty good, especially compared to VMware. If we are talking about this initial cost to set up (and not talking about future maintenance), it's about 40% cheaper than VMware.

We have a three-year license that we pay yearly. I can't speak about the exact price. 

I'm a customer and an end-user.

We're using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd recommend the product to others. It's easier to manage and scalable. However, much like VMware, you do need to engage with a third party to integrate it.

I'd rate it nine out of ten.

On-premises

We were look for less expensive virtualization solution that can accommodate our VM workload and provide virtualized storage as well.

Our old environment consisted to multiple SAN storage devices. Maintenance such equipment is very costly and requires a separate in network infrastructure.

We wanted to utilize storage capacity available in our hypervisor nodes to provide clustered storage service using storage virtualization technologies similar to Microsoft S2D and VMWare vSAN, but at a low cost.

No, it did not improve our organization. At first Sangfor HCI look good product, but one we started to use it we faced many comparability issues. It is an appliance style of product and we cannot have administrative access to it. Where as in Hyper-V, ESXi, and/or KVM we can have an admin level access to install or add-ons or agents. Also it is not compatible with any cloud service providers e.g. Azure/AWS/GCP and neither it has hardware certified by any leading ERP providers.

After using it for 3 years only thing good about it is that it's cost less compared to Microsoft, and VMware solutions.

The features that Microsoft, and VMware gives on their Data Center and Enterprise licenses are provided by Sangfor HCI on Standard license.

Other than this there is no valuable feature.

Sangfor HCI can improve it's self in many ways.
1) Admin need a granular control on their system. There is no command line interface like we get in Hyper-V and ESXi.
2) The documentation and support from the community are not available. Support engineer lack knowledge also.
3) GUI also requires much working as well. The web interface of HCI and SCP are not user friendly.
4) No compatibility with third party solution and also no support with cloud services (Azure/AWS/GCP) and leading ERP providers.

I've been using the solution for 3 years now.

The all appliance solutions are stable and reliable, Sangfor HCI is the same.

The solution is scalable. You just have to add a node to the current cluster. It's not difficult.

The support engineer skills are not that good. They especially the support team we got in our country lack knowledge of their own product. There's a general lack of information. The documentation and knowledge base or community portal are lacking. I'd rate this aspect two out of ten.

Negative

We were using Microsoft Hyper-V. We decided to switch because we needed a solution that consists of storage virtualization. We also needed to remove our out dated SAN environment.

Since it is an appliance the setup is straight forward and quick.

We had three people from our company and two people from the vendor
handling the initial setup. Maintenance after setup is fairly basic and
requires simply looking after the hardware and looking out for heavy
usage of the processor. Three people are looking after it on the admin
side.

We have deployed it at two of our sites. One is at the head office, and the other is at our disaster recovery site.

We had help from the vendor. They were on-site and helped to integrate everything. But they lacked expertise.

ROI is not that good. After running it for almost 3 years and we had not a good experience with it.

Pricing is very cheap compared to Hyper-V and VMware.
Since it is an appliance setup cost in terms in time is very low.

Yes we evaluated VMware's solution. But management decided for Sangfor HCI as it was very cheap in cost.

With the experience we faced we will give it 2 out of 10 as the admin level experience is not good. No command line support. No third party integration. No public cloud support. No proper documentation.

If anyone is looking for a less expensive appliance type HCI then they can consider it. But for hybrid environments the solution fails.  

Hybrid Cloud

Microsoft Azure

We are using Sangfor HCI for cloud computing and operating it as an infrastructure-as-a-service.

We find the topology feature of Sangfor HCI particularly valuable. It allows us to design and define the architecture according to our specific requirements.

We can choose the components we want to use and easily visualize the layout we create.

It would be beneficial if Sangfor HCI provided us with more tools to perform various tasks. Currently, when we need to do capacity planning, we have to rely on Sangfor's support team for assistance. However, if there were dedicated tools available, we could handle it ourselves and increase efficiency.

For instance, Nutanix has some tools called Nutanix sizing tools. I would like Sangfor to offer similar tools specifically for IT sizing. These tools would help us accurately size our infrastructure since we operate on a service basis. We have numerous customers with different needs, and being able to easily size the infrastructure based on specific criteria would be advantageous. Currently, we face challenges in obtaining customer information, as it is not feasible to visit each customer individually and collect data. 

Having a dedicated tool for this purpose would greatly improve our operations. I've heard from the community that such a tool exists, but I don't know where to download it or how to access it as a user. 

If such features exist, it would be beneficial to understand how we utilize those features, check their functionality, and manipulate them.

We have documentation available for this solution. However, it may not provide detailed information about these specific tools. It's not easy to find comprehensive documentation for this type of tool.

I have been using this solution for more than two years. 

Sangfor HCI is a stable solution. I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. It's quite good.

However, there are some points I'm concerned about. Particularly, it relates to the ITC and application delivery controller (ADC). We had pushed out licenses for that component, but we recently learned that it had reached its end of life. We received this information from the community, but we're unsure if it's confirmed. Initially, we implemented it, but later, Sangfor support advised us to discontinue its use. So, we didn't fully deploy that component. As a result, we are unable to achieve load balancing as planned. We purchased the ADC license, but now we can't utilize it.

On Sangfor HCI, you can usually integrate various components, including a virtual ADC. However, in our case, we faced limitations due to the ADC license.

I would rate the scalability of Sangfor HCI a seven out of ten. I haven't implemented all aspects of Sangfor HCI. 

Currently, there are around ten end users using Sangfor HCI in our organization. 

The customer service and support have been helpful in assisting us with various matters. However, the response time could be better. It should be faster.

Positive

We have used Hyper-V and VMware vSphere in our lab environment. In my opinion, Sangfor HCI stands out because of its comprehensive features and very easy to implement, which I haven't experienced with Hyper-V.

The initial setup is simple. 

We deployed the solution with the help of Sangfor's support. 

The price is a bit better than overall.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. It's mainly because of the sizing tools. When comparing it to solutions like Nutanix, for example, they have already signed and implemented tools that provide more functionality. They offer software-based solutions that can be accessed online, providing greater convenience.

So, having more comprehensive and easily accessible tools is an important aspect. It gives you a clearer understanding of the available space and enables you to communicate with the service providers to ensure better security measures.

On-premises