Azure NetApp Files is a Microsoft Azure file storage service built on NetApp technology, giving users the file capabilities in Azure that core business applications require, with pricing plans for different performance tiers.
$21,474,836.48
per month
Vultr
Score 6.9 out of 10
N/A
Vultr is an independent cloud computing platform on a mission to provide businesses and developers around the world with unrivaled ease of use, price-to-performance, and global reach.
$1
per month
Pricing
Azure NetApp Files
Vultr
Editions & Modules
Restore
$0.02/GiB
per month
Backup
$0.05/GiB
per month
Cross Region Replication Daily - Replication frequency is once a day
$0.11/GiB
per month
Cross Region Replication Hourly - Replication frequency is every 1 hour
$0.12/GiB
per month
Cross Region Replication Minutes - Replication frequency is every 10 mins
$0.14/GiB
per month
Standard Storage
$0.14746 per GiB
per month
Premium Storage
$0.29419 per GiB
per month
Ultra Storage
$0.39274 per GiB
per month
Block Storage
$1
per month
Cloud Compute
$2.50
per month
Object Storage
$5
per month
Kubernetes Engine
$10
per month
Load Balancers
$10
per month
Managed Databases
$15
per month
Optimized Cloud Compute
$28
per month
Cloud GPU
$90
per month
Bare Metal
$120
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure NetApp Files
Vultr
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
Azure NetApp Files (ANF) cloud file storage service is charged per hour based on the provisioned ANF capacity. Customers can provision a minimum of 4TiB of ANF capacity and then add additional provision capacity in the increments of 1TiB. Cross Region Replication pricing varies by the desired replication frequency per unit of data, and the region of the destination volume.
Pricing is based on specifications chosen in each product category. Bandwidth is also included up to a certain amount per month.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure NetApp Files
Vultr
Considered Both Products
Azure NetApp Files
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Azure NetApp Files
Attribution in Google Analytics (Adometry), Acoustic Content (formerly IBM Watson Content Hub) and Amazon Augmented AI (Amazon A2I)
We tried the same with Azure File Share (Azure Storage Account), but it has a really small limit (5TB per share). It didnt fulfilled our requirements, as we have some on-prem shares with 60+TB each, still to be migrated. We have also evaluated a different approach, which is …
The solution is amazing. It scales up and down, which is quite unique for a cloud solution and also it is billed to you on a per-hour basis, which provides a great opportunity to save the cost when you don't need it. Compared to others, we really liked that option for Azure …
Azure NetApp Files is very well integrated with Microsoft Azure, we use the same request methods that everyone knows from Azure. NetApp and Microsoft has built a very efficient solution that allows you to transfer virtually any service to the Microsoft public cloud. Azure …
We briefly looked at Amazon Elastic File System. From the small amount of research we did, Amazon EFS was comparable, but in the end we already had a NetApp infrastructure and were a Microsoft shop, so melding them together using Azure NetApp Files made sense.
I did not have a say in the selection process, but I am a satisfied user. I have used and tried other products or cloud storage applications; however, I was not impressed, as many of them have limited functionality and have some issues with security. My department was in need …
Vultr comes in at the lower end of the spectrum in terms of the breadth of the services they provide compared to the larger vendors, but they are consistently demonstrating their commitment to growing their service offering and platform features. We selected Vultr because of …
Vultr has a greater offering of servers whilst staying reasonably priced compared to some of the larger infrastructure providers. They may not have all the services as some of the other providers but they don't need it when they can do what they do with the services they provide.
Vultr has better support and competitive pricing. The network is solid and globally deployed. IP reputation is clean, and security is tight. Ease of use and documentation is really good. User experience has been the best I ever experienced. Low stress, reliable …
The performance beats upcloud. The only thing I really liked about upcloud better was the backup offerings. They had more flexible backup plans, but I love the every other night plan on Vultr as well.
CloudCo was not listed. In comparison, the pricing of the competition is in a place where I wouldn't retain any margin for smaller customers, that's why I use Vultr for those. Vultr's self serve interface and UI is much better and more customizable for the general architect. If …
Vultr has been a more cost effective solution in some areas. Compared to AWS EC2, Vultr has been a lot more cost effective for our environment. Vultr has the right vCPU, RAM, and storage for our needs. In the object storage space, Vultr has not been the best fit for our …
Vultr offers the same services as all the major cloud providers however Vulr offers a clear pricing modeling with no hidden fees. This has been incisive in deciding which provider to go with. I have never encountered any downtime with their services Technically, Vultr has the …
From the perspective of the above, Vultr provides the best balance of cost vs. performance for us. Cloudways stacks a large fee for each VPS you spin up, and this quickly escalates. Linode comes closest (at least when I used it a few years ago) to Vultr, and 3 years ago this …
Vultr is much easier to get started with, less things to configure, a simpler interface. To deploy and manage a server is much easier. I am sure for a production SaaS app there are features in AWS and Azure that are needed, but for dev/test environment, I prefer Vultr.
Vultr is a dream to use after coming from AWS - the products are intuitively named, don't require gaining a certification to use, and have better documentation. Vultr's documentation is a little less comprehensive and organized than google cloud's; however, its pricing and …
Linode: Similar pricing, changed our business over to Vultr to save credit card fees by using Crypto. Digital Ocean: Fast and reliable, same pricing didn't stay because the payment methods (Similar case to Linode) Hetzner: Good pricing, good reputation, limited locations.
For us, with Azure NetApp Files, the ease of use has been big. We have an operations organization where ease of use is key--also it simplifies migration to the cloud. Azure NetApp Files eliminates a common cloud-first barrier by creating the right infrastructure environment for agencies' resources, budgets, and skillsets. We would like to be able to version the files that are coming in. So, if a file is accidentally deleted, there should have a recycle bin option where we can go back and, at least once, clean it up. They could probably improve the versioning and other advanced features. The replication is not available in all the Azure Availability Zones.
Vultr is well suited for South African based organisations as they have a presence here. It makes dev servers for WordPress more feasible. Having to wait on roundtrips from EU or US slow things down.
Ease of setting up new servers, with clear information on what you are getting for what you pay, makes it so easy to spin up just what you need. With a large range of specifications it means you can find that sweet spot of cost vs. performance.
We have found that it scales very well. In some cases we had a large existing storage infrastructure and were able to migrate it while other times we started from scratch with low storage demands and Azure NetApp Files fit the bill each time.
We have been impressed with the replication capabailities.
The read and write speed when interacting with files is a major asset.
the ability of increasing a specific configuration without the need of upgrading the whole plan, for example i might need to add more memory but i'm satisfied with my current processors and hard disk capacity (or vise versa)
Solving the problems of taking an image to the server if the server capacity (hard disk) is bigger than 1TB (which i'm currently facing a big problem because of that)
We’ve been extremely satisfied with the service for many years. After trying other providers, we’ve found nothing that matches the reliability and performance—so we’re not likely to switch anytime soon.
easy to use and configure. great bang for the buck. I need an affordable solution to host in the cloud data from systems installed at our client's site with the ability to drill down and change the configuration remotely. Vultr enabled us to do that in an efficient and affordable way.
We tried the same with Azure File Share (Azure Storage Account), but it has a really small limit (5TB per share). It didnt fulfilled our requirements, as we have some on-prem shares with 60+TB each, still to be migrated. We have also evaluated a different approach, which is Komprise archiving solution, to archive older files to Azure BLOBS and free up some space on the on-prem storages to accomodate new data.
Vultr has better support and competitive pricing. The network is solid and globally deployed. IP reputation is clean, and security is tight. Ease of use and documentation is really good. User experience has been the best I ever experienced. Low stress, reliable hosting I would recommend to anyone. It helped me easily scale and expand my business.
The main hurdle in promoting this solution is the price. Its price definitely requires an improvement. It is more expensive than other options, so customers go for a cheaper option.