Cisco HyperFlex Systems is a hyper-converged infrastructure product, based on technology acquired with SpringPath (acquired September 2017). Cisco's modern HCI solution is Cisco Compute Hyperconverged with Nutanix.
N/A
Scale Computing Platform
Score 8.1 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
Cisco HyperFlex (discontinued)
Scale Computing Platform
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Standard
$249
per year per core
Professional
$312
per year per core
Professional Essentials
$5,600
one-time fee
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco HyperFlex (discontinued)
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.
Cisco HyperFlex is the brain and control for applications and solutions delivered in the ecosystem of customers using Decsis Datacenter in a multi-site, multi-customer environment.
I feel HyperFlex provide a more robust user interface and interaction with your storage. It allows for easy deployment of LUNs and connectivity to your Hosts. The ease of use provides a better end user experience to those new to the storage and virtualization platforms. …
VMware vSAN is more elastic and easy to sell as you can have more flexibility with the hardware and can use or just upgrade hardware already deployment in the client infrastructure and additionally its have no dependencies about the DNS/NTP, what is important..
Hyperflex is that it is a simplified product that assists in the storage of software data and also provides an infrastructure for data optimization and network management quickly and efficiently.
Cisco was selected due to more favorable financing. HPE financing was more difficult to obtain. Hyperflex is very different from other solutions - highly redundant with a fast backplane, but many techs are not familiar with the solution and typically prefer the more traditional …
Compares favorably to Nutanix and SimpliVity. Nutanix however has been around longer and has a bigger feature set than Hyperflex, which is in Nutanix's favor. However, while Nutanix does everything, it doesn't always do everything well.
Cisco HyperFlex is easier to manage than other BladeSystem or Hyper-Converged systems. I would say it is in line with Pure Storage Arrays as far as ease of use goes.
As part of the solution, Cisco HyperFlex gives you more options for managing, monitoring and controlling your enterprise infrastructure. The mobility and flexibility of the services allow administrators full control of the server farm and services. In addition, the availability …
HyperFlex is built on top of Cisco UCS infrastructure, which allows us to manage other non-HX servers attached to the same UCS environment. This allows us to tie everything together via Intersight and see all of the servers in our data centers. Other platforms don't really …
Interestingly enough, depending on which box you purchased the two may be able to be combined into one setup. The UCS series is great and provides a lot of compute but lacks the storage. Hyperfex has a bit less compute but contains lots of storage space and memory needed for …
HX stacks up well ahead of the competition (we are running all the three HCI's) in terms of performance, stability, seamless integration with network backbone (no conflicts!), unified management of UCSM and most importantly, it helped us setup data centre level HA just with 2 …
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.
Smaller sites that would benefit from a cluster of 2-5 nodes. Not saying that it can't scale above that, but I find HyperFlex a great solution for those sites. A simple 3-node edge cluster can provide a huge amount of resources and redundancy. It's also really easy to scale the environment to meet growth requirements.
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.
Too much integration with Cisco UCS fabric interconnects is required, which makes the product most useful for customers who already have Cisco UCS. Options without fabric interconnects are limited.
Hyper-V integration is way behind (but to be fair I think that's true for most vendors in this space).
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 never contacted Cisco support for any problem. I cannot skip this question. It provides good hardware for my organization to using this product. All the updates will be made promptly. Anything happen we just need to open a ticket to the helpdesk team. We can get new info from a team in Malaysia.
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.
VMware vSAN is more elastic and easy to sell as you can have more flexibility with the hardware and can use or just upgrade hardware already deployment in the client infrastructure and additionally its have no dependencies about the DNS/NTP, what is important..
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.
HX made positive impact on our overall business objective and helped in reducing operational and capital expenditures almost by 60%
We used to have huge footprint of FC SAN storage and highly skilled SME's to manage the FC SAN environments. HX helped in getting rid of costly SAN investments and we could move the skilled SMEs on higher work stack. With HX, we are able to effectively manage day to day operations with less skilled resources.
We also benefitted largely from the single OEM support (Cisco end to end for HX, network fabric and hypervisor). In earlier case, we used to log service requests to SAN vendor, Hypervisor vendor and network fabric vendor separately. In case of inter-related issues between the vendors, our business used to suffer. These all challenges are removed by HX adoption. This is helping us support the business with maximum uptime ever. Our service SLA's are also improved by 70%