Virtual Machines (VMs) are available on Microsoft Azure, providing what is built as a low-cost, per-second compute service, available via Windows or Linux.
$0
Per Hour
Scale Computing Platform
Score 8.0 out of 10
Mid-Size Companies (51-1,000 employees)
Scale Computing offers edge computing, virtualization, and hyperconverged solutions for customers around the globe. Scale Computing HyperCore software promises to eliminate traditional virtualization software, disaster recovery software, servers, and shared storage, replacing these with a fully integrated, highly available system for running applications. The vendor says that, using patented HyperCore™ technology, the SC//HyperCore self-healing platform automatically identifies, mitigates, and…
$249
per year per core
Pricing
Azure Virtual Machines
Scale Computing Platform
Editions & Modules
3 Year Reserved - Burstable VMs - B1S
$0.0038
Per Hour
Spot - General Purpose - Av2
$0.005
Per Hour
1 Year Reserved - Burstable VMs - B1S
$0.0059
Per Hour
Pay as You Go - Burstable VMs - B1S
$0.0075
Per Hour
Spot - Compute Optimized - Fsv2
$0.0104
Per Hour
Spot - General Purpose - Dv3
$0.0125
Per Hour
Spot - Memory Optimized - Ev3
$0.016
Per Hour
3 Year Reserved - Compute Optimized - Fsv2
$0.0307
Per Hour
3 Year Reserved - General Purpose - Dv3
$0.0369
Per Hour
3 Year Reserved - Memory Optimized - Ev3
$0.0481
Per Hour
1 Year Reserved - Compute Optimized - Fsv2
$0.05
Per Hour
1 Year Reserved - General Purpose - Dv3
$0.0548
Per Hour
1 Year Reserved - Memory Optimized - Ev3
$0.0753
Per Hour
Pay as You Go - Compute Optimized - Fsv2
$0.0846
Per Hour
Pay as You Go - General Purpose - Dv3
$0.096
Per Hour
Pay as You Go - Memory Optimized - Ev3
$0.126
Per Hour
Standard
$249
per year per core
Professional
$312
per year per core
Professional Essentials
$5,600
one-time fee
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure Virtual Machines
Scale Computing Platform
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
—
Pricing shown in U.S. Dollar.
Pricing for other regions available on request.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure Virtual Machines
Scale Computing Platform
Considered Both Products
Azure Virtual Machines
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Azure Virtual Machines
Azure Virtual Machines offer unparalleled flexibility in provisioning, managing and upgrading the VM instances, both manually and programmatically. AVM offer very granular billing options and enables high costs optimisations (while still being costly). The other competitors I …
Oracle Cloud Infrastructure's Compute supports Windows, but is really geared towards Linux. You can install Windows on some Linode servers, but again, Linode is geared towards Linux. AWS does everything but is complex and can have high costs.
Azure VM's are far way cost effective than the AWS EC2 service also Azure VM's provides up Smart Hybrid Cloud integration with the Existing on Prem architecture. One of the key feature of Azure VM are they provide High availability and data redundant zones for the VM to be hosted.
We use both Azure and AWS VM services currently. AWS' EC2s have been around for longer an offer a much more reliable Linux OS support. But the gap getting smaller by the day, and Azure VMs are catching up nicely. In our case, we use a lot AWS for Linux-based applications …
Our main reason for selection of Azure Virtual Machines was easy availability of databricks and windows based VM natively. These features are not available on EC2.
Amazon EC2 provides a cost-friendly server hosting platform but the underlying infrastructure of Azure Virtual Machines is way more speedy and responsive than AWS. We have a 40:60 ratio of our servers deployed on Azure and Amazon and I can tell you how responsive and …
Amazon EC2 is useful for easy migration from physical to virtual. While Azure Virtual Machines are very handy to use and the management console is very simple which gives all the important features at a glance of a screen. We have a good presence of virtualization and Windows …
I have tested AWS EC2 instances, however, we chose
Azure Virtual Machines as we use SCOM as an enterprise monitoring solution and it goes very well
with Azure as monitoring. We have a lot of customers on Azure and monitoring the Azure environment with SCOM is easy through
Azure Virtual Machines is much easier to manage and is a user-friendly management console. Billing is much easier and more predictable to calculate and expect, the configuration is much easier to access and change, the cost is cheaper for Azure Virtual Machines than other …
More or less these are comparable offerings in my opinion as a user of both the AWS and Azure Clouds in a business environment in which there's a use case for a multi-cloud environment. We were able to complete a feature parody between the Azure Cloud and AWS Cloud for key …
We also use AWS Cloud Services, personally, I think AWS is a little more expensive than Azure Virtual Machines but its swings and roundabouts mostly. I prefer the interfaces in Azure Virtual Machines as I feel I'm closer to the Machine than with AWS and my roots are from a …
If you have Fffice360 and use Azure for data and other purposes, I will suggest using Azure Virtual Machine for better integration and security. Pros and cons from both, but it's more convenient to stay on the same platform for security and stability.
Azure has a better interface than its competitors like Amazon and IBM. It is more intuitive and easier to use. It also has more features like connection troubleshooting, boot diagnostics, and running remote commands.
Azure Virtual Machines was faster, cheaper, and took up less storage than Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling and is why we continue to use it to this day. We are very satisfied with all that Azure Virtual Machines can do and would recommend it to anyone looking for a virtual machine in …
The scale is as robust as VMware's but needs more vendor support, such as VEEAM, for backup. Scale overall costs caused us to move to the platform to reduce our overall costs from hardware and maintenance costs.
I have found Scale Computing Platform to be a lot simpler. I don't need to have a vSphere server running. I don't have to worry about my predecessor leaving my SAN carved up into small buckets, etc. I also don't need hearing protection when I am in the server room now, so …
I used VMware when it first came out and for several years after that but then took a break from it for years. When I came back, it was way too complicated and ultimately was too much work to learn and make useful in our environment. Scale Computing Platform was so attractive …
I'm fairly well versed in traditional VMWare installations on a variety of hardware, and even HP's first attempts at hyperconverged infrastructure. Scale Computing Platform is much easier to implement than any of those. 3 1U machines, no external storage, no SAN switch to …
We used a mixture of VMWare and stand-alone servers prior to moving to the Scale Computing Platform. After the initial investment, this has lowered our cost to maintain our server environment.
VM management is easier and faster. Snapshot management is easier and faster. User accounts are simpler to manage (though less granular). Basic alerts are easier to setup, though VMWare has a more granular approach. Updates to the Scale Computing Platform itself is so much …
We previously used Microsoft Hyper V and VMWare and, before that, a room for single-purpose servers. My satisfaction with Scale is because it is a more straightforward product to install and use; it has incredible speed and reliability. In the past, getting support from …
We ended up choosing Scale Computing Platform 4 years ago because that had better pricing than the other players and would offer everything we elected as pre-requisite for our system to work. Today, after several years using their system with no major issues, we can say it was …
We evaluated HP, VMware and Dell. These systems were all outside our budget (very substantially, in some cases) or required more management to deploy than Scale Computing Platform.
Scale has all the required features for failover and system availability that any other product has at a better price point. User interface is much easier to understand and is not cluttered with things you don't need.
Under 10 nodes and less than 2 sites, I would rather sell and support Scale. It's just as fast as any other HCI and more stable then VXRail. It's easier to setup and deploy, and get VM's running, and replicating between clusters. The only reason I would not consider Scale …
Scale Computing Platform provided all the functionalities we needed for our daily operations, with features that align with our processes. It has the advantage of a unified software package, without add-ons, which proved to be a financial advantage during the acquisition. It …
I have chosen Scale Computing Platform over the Nutanix for this reasons, #1 is the price difference between Scale Computing Platform and Nutanix. #2 is the complexity and ease of use of both solutions. In my opinion, Scale Computing Platform is way above nutanix as to the …
Price was outstanding, and competitive equipment wasn't an issue due to them using various brands and models. Sales reps were responsive, professional, and jumped through time hurdles with ease. Partnership with Acronis is a huge benefit, and the Carbonite license to move …
Cheaper, better, us-based support. Easier Administration. Lacks 3rd party backup and disaster recovery (bare-metal) A lot of people just have never heard of Scale Computing Platform so it's tough to figure out what the best on-prem, cloud-based DR services to use.
I have used both Hyper-V and VMWare. I continue to run a Hyper-V cluster and think it's great. More work to setup than the Scale nodes. VMWare is too expensive for education and not worth the time in my opinion.
It's well suited to delivering information about our sports events as during the events a lot of processing power is needed and instantly becomes available by scaling out when the event is over the service can be scaled right back making massive savings. We use it for football, horse racing, Olympics games etc, it is also used when things happen in the world like right now there is a lot of concern over the Russia and Ukraine conflict, since the demand for this information is high we instantly scale to meet the demand of our news feed services. I believe up to 90% of the UK's News, sports and media information actually passes through our computer systems, we are a market leading news and information service and Azure Virtual Machines provide us with the reliability that we need so that we can provide a rock solid reliable news and information service to the world.
Scale is best suited to environments that do not have excessive external or proprietary peripherals. Integrating with tape drive backups or robot tape libraries can be problematic. The most effective use of Scale systems is for companies running multiple instances of the same operating system. The hypervisor's code/file-sharing nature does an excellent job managing new instances while keeping the increase in storage to a minimum.
Pricing can be a concern if you are truly agnostic to which cloud you are building your particular solution in.
The UI, as is the case with any cloud provider, is crowded.
As with any cloud provider, it can be difficult to tune in exactly the right amount of servers for your needs...you might find yourself under/overprovisioning.
Display the IP address of the node on which the VM is running on the Devices (gear icon) tab. This would allow me to manage my Microsoft license easier.
During the on-boarding I missed the step to install the Scale Computing Platform tools, and we didn't notice this until I had issues with backups. It would be helpful if some kind of alert notification would display on a VM card if the tools were not installed.
Add a new health or diagnostics tab that would display alerts, diagnostic tools, performance concerns or pattern anomalies.
Some kind of email/alert when a disk reaches near capacity
I'm on the fence about renewing the support contract. The reliability of the HC3 makes it difficult to spend the cost of the renewal which is higher than the costs prior to Scale. I'm convinced if we were a larger district that the savings would be tremendous and I wouldn't hesitate to renew. In our specific situation, it may be more feasible to pay per incident.
Everything you need to do is point-and-click easy. If you are the kind of admin who wants to edit every config file and endlessly customize your environment, then Scale may not be for you. On the other hand, if you just want it to work really well, and do what they told you it will do, then Scale is the ideal system.
I give the overall support for Azure Virtual Machines a 7 because I think while the overall support do a great job there are still areas that it could improve on such as efficiency and speed. So while I only give it a 7 and it has some issues it is still better than the overall support at Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling.
We had one need for support post-setup, and the person who answered the phone was the support person I needed. No transfer, no level one, and our accents were similar enough that we understood each other easily. The problem was actually in my switch, not with Scale, but the support person still assisted me and got the entire cluster up and running again in under 30 minutes. They are truly a partner not just a vendor.
The implementation was very easy. We had Scale support on standby and they were ready and eager to help if needed. The process went so fast the employees in the organization did not even know it was done.
Oracle Cloud Infrastructure's Compute supports Windows, but is really geared towards Linux. You can install Windows on some Linode servers, but again, Linode is geared towards Linux. AWS does everything but is complex and can have high costs. If you want to host Windows servers in the cloud, nothing beats Azure. From licensing to management, Microsoft Azure provides the easiest way to deploy and manage Windows Servers in the cloud, especially if you utilize other Microsoft services like Microsoft 365 an Visual Studio subscriptions.
As mentioned previously, not having to worry about the compatibility between your hardware, hypervisor, and VM OS is a great help. On the downside, there is less ability to get deep in the weeds with your own system. Much of the Scale HyperCore OS is locked down intentionally, which prevents technical users from having much insight on broad error messages without support intervention.
HC3 is one of the best products I have purchased for our district. It is unbelievably reliable to the point that they shoot themselves in the foot on support contracts.
It's so easy to spin up new instances, that it becomes also to easy to have to many of them to manage. Many teams end up with a couple of hundreds of VMs after a short while, making the whole thing very hard to maneuver
Azure VMs are the next step for us to rely on Onprem servers, and leaving the management of the infrastructure to the professionals
The ease of use, is also important when our main focus is to deliver new applications and integrations fast, and not having to worry about infrastructure. We sell bottles, not CPUs