Azure NetApp Files vs IBM Turbonomic comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
NetApp Logo
2,377 views|1,523 comparisons
93% willing to recommend
IBM Logo
958 views|433 comparisons
98% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

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

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Migration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Azure NetApp Files vs. IBM Turbonomic Report (Updated: May 2024).
772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"It has saved a lot of time. Because in the older, conventional hardware system, they need to raise a ticket to go to storage engineering, then storage engineering would increased the size. Now, it's dynamic. You don't have to do anything. This improved the time by more than 50 percent.""Azure NetApp Files has been stable.""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.""Its security and ease of use are most valuable.""One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities.""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.""This solution definitely makes us more efficient in being able to provide storage quickly to our customers in the Azure Cloud."

More Azure NetApp Files Pros →

"It has automated a lot of things. We have saved 30 to 35 percent in human resource time and cost, which is pretty substantial. We don't have a big workforce here, so we have to use all the automation we can get.""With over 2500 ESX VMs, including 1500+ XenDesktop VDI desktops, hosted over two datacentres and 80+ vSphere hosts, firefighting has become something of the past.""The most valuable features are the cluster utilization reports and the resource capacity planning. We can simulate how much capacity we can add to the current resources. The individual DM reports and VM-facing recommendations report are also helpful.""The most important feature to us is an objective measurement of VM headroom per cluster. In addition, the ability to check for the right-sizing of VMs.""The solution has a good optimization feature.""The feature for optimizing VMs is the most valuable because a number of the agencies have workloads or VMs that are not really being used. Turbonomic enables us to say, 'If you combine these, or if you decide to go with a reserve instance, you will save this much.'""The automated memory balancing, where it looks at whether it's being used in the most efficient way and adds or takes away memory, is the best part. If it didn't do that, it would be something that I would have to do. We have too many machines for one person to do that. The automation helps me in that it is done in a really efficient way and a balanced way because of the policies. It really helps.""Using this product helps us to reduce performance risk because it shows us where resources are needed but not yet allocated."

More IBM Turbonomic Pros →

Cons
"This solution would be improved with more innovation.""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.""Azure NetApp Files is expensive.""The solution needs to improve it's ABS environment.""Reserved Instances for Azure NetApp Files would improve more use cases, making them more valuable in Azure as the cost would be reduced.""I have a hunch that storage could be now the most expensive portion of our monthly bill. So I can imagine that, not this year, but next year we will be talking about looking deeper into ways how we can optimize the cost.""We would like to see more paired regions for the replication.""The deployment process is somewhat complex compared to other storage solutions."

More Azure NetApp Files Cons →

"Since the introduction of a HTML 5 based interface, our main - but minor - criticism of a less than intuitive operation managers' GUI would be the area of improvement.""Enhanced executive reporting standard with the tool beyond the reports that can be created today. Something that can easily be used with upper management on a monthly or quarterly basis to show the impact to our environment.""I like the detail I get in the old user interface and will miss some of that in the new interface when we perform our planned upgrade soon.""The planning and costing areas could be a little bit more detailed. When you have more than 2,000 machines, the reports don't work properly. They need to fix it so that the reports work when you use that many virtual machines.""The deployment process is a little tricky. It wasn't hard for me because I have pretty in-depth knowledge of Kubernetes, and their software runs on Kubernetes. To deploy it or upgrade it, you have to be able to follow steps and use the Kubernetes command line, or you'll need someone to come in and do it for you.""In Azure, it's not what you're using. You purchase the whole 8 TB disk and you pay for it. It doesn't matter how much you're using. So something that I've asked for from Turbonomic is recommendations based on disk utilization. In the example of the 8 TB disk where only 200 GBs are being used, based on the history, there should be a recommendation like, "You can safely use a 500 GB disk." That would create a lot of savings.""The old interface was not the clearest UI in some areas, and could be quite intimidating when first using the tool.""The GUI and policy creation have room for improvement. There should be a better view of some of the numbers that are provided and easier to access. And policy creation should have it easier to identify groups."

More IBM Turbonomic Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The solution’s combination of the ease of use, simplicity, and reduction in IT management versus the cost has helped a lot. It is very fast to deploy. It's very easy to maintain. You don't have to do a lot in the cloud to maintain this thing, so it gives good performance. It's fast to deploy, easy to maintain, and it gives a better performance. These are the most basic three criteria for any application. This saves cost because the manpower you need to deploy is going down. You're getting better performance and not buying new resources. You have resources available in the cloud. It's just a couple of clicks, then you're good to go."
  • "The performance has improved by about 30 percent."
  • "The licensing fees for this solution vary, ranging from a single shelf to a full suite."
  • "Our pricing has not been determined because we are still waiting on additional features."
  • "It is expensive in small environments, which could be better. The reason is the four terabyte minimum. A one terabyte minimum would be better."
  • "We are currently on a pay-as-you-go model with the storage that we use."
  • "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."
  • "The price of Azure NetApp Files could be better."
  • More Azure NetApp Files Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "We felt the pricing was very fair for the product. It is in no way prohibitive for larger deployments, unlike other similar product on the market."
  • "Contact the Turbonomic sales team, explain your needs and what you're looking to monitor. They will get a pre-sales SE on the phone and together work up a very accurate quote."
  • "What I can advise is to trial the product, taking advantage of the Turbonomic pre-sales implemention support and kickstart training."
  • "Licensing is per socket, so load up on the cores rather than a lot of lower core CPUs."
  • "You should understand the cost of your physical servers and how much time and money you are spending year over year on expanding your virtual farm."
  • "Price is a big one. VMTurbo was very competitively priced."
  • "If you're a super-small business, it may be a little bit pricey for you... But in large, enterprise companies where money is, maybe, less of an issue, Turbonomic is not that expensive. I can't imagine why any big company would not buy it, for what it does."
  • "It was an annual buy-in. You basically purchase it based on your host type stuff. The buy-in was about 20K, and the annual maintenance is about $3,000 a year."
  • More IBM Turbonomic Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Migration solutions are best for your needs.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: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 the… more »
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer:I have not seen Turbonomic's new pricing since IBM purchased it. When we were looking at it in my previous company before IBM's purchase, it was compatible with other tools.
    Top Answer:I would like Turbonomic to add more services, especially in the cloud area. I have already told them this. They can add Azure NetApp Files. They can add Azure Blob storage. They have already added… more »
    Top Answer:I mostly provide it to my clients. There are multiple reasons why they would use it depending on the client's needs and their solution.
    Ranking
    3rd
    out of 38 in Cloud Migration
    Views
    2,377
    Comparisons
    1,523
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    585
    Rating
    8.0
    5th
    out of 38 in Cloud Migration
    Views
    958
    Comparisons
    433
    Reviews
    14
    Average Words per Review
    1,360
    Rating
    8.4
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    NetApp ANF, ANF
    Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
    Learn More
    IBM
    Video Not Available
    Interactive Demo
    NetApp
    Demo Not Available
    Overview

    Extreme File Performance
    Azure NetApp Files allows you to target any of your business-critical file workloads with extreme file throughput with sub-millisecond response times.With three service levels you can change on-the-fly, you get the performance that’s best suited to the application.

    Simple, Seamless Experience
    A seamless Azure experience for your file services workloads. You can deploy and manage Azure NetApp Files directory from the Azure Portal or automate using the Azure API or CLI integration.

    Secure Your Data
    Built-in capabilities ensure your data is protected at all times in Azure: from always-on encryption to point-in-time data copies (without added capacity costs). And with Microsoft‘s world class support, you can rest assured that you‘re in good hands with Azure.

    IBM Turbonomic is a performance and cost optimization platform for public, private, and hybrid clouds used by customers to assure application performance while eliminating inefficiencies by dynamically resourcing applications through automated actions. Common use cases include cloud cost optimization, cloud migration planning, data center modernization, FinOps acceleration, Kubernetes optimization, sustainable IT, and application resource management. Turbonomic customers report an average 33% reduction in cloud and infrastructure waste without impacting application performance, and return-on-investment of 471% over three years. Ready to take a closer look? Explore the interactive demo or start your free 30-day trial today!

    Sample Customers
    SAP, Restaurant Magic
    IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company25%
    Retailer17%
    Government8%
    Healthcare Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization27%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Computer Software Company9%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    REVIEWERS
    Healthcare Company13%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Energy/Utilities Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Financial Services Firm16%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Insurance Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise67%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise35%
    Large Enterprise52%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise23%
    Large Enterprise60%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise71%
    Buyer's Guide
    Azure NetApp Files vs. IBM Turbonomic
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Azure NetApp Files vs. IBM Turbonomic and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Azure NetApp Files is ranked 3rd in Cloud Migration with 15 reviews while IBM Turbonomic is ranked 5th in Cloud Migration with 204 reviews. Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.2, while IBM Turbonomic is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Azure NetApp Files writes "We can expand our storage on-the-fly without the need to reprovision". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Turbonomic writes "The solution reduced our operational expenditures and is able to identify points before we even noticed them ". Azure NetApp Files is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Nasuni and Wasabi, whereas IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Azure Cost Management, Cisco Intersight, VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth and VMware vSphere. See our Azure NetApp Files vs. IBM Turbonomic report.

    See our list of best Cloud Migration vendors.

    We monitor all Cloud Migration 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.