Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs Azure NetApp Files comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 17, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon EFS (Elastic File Sy...
Ranking in Cloud Storage
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
File and Object Storage (8th)
Azure NetApp Files
Ranking in Cloud Storage
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (2nd), Public Cloud Storage Services (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Cloud Storage category, the mindshare of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is 8.0%, down from 9.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Azure NetApp Files is 9.0%, down from 10.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Storage
 

Featured Reviews

MuhammadAzhar Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Auto-scaling capabilities enhance file management while reducing downtime
The most valuable feature of Amazon EFS is its auto-scaling capability. It's really easy to configure EFS by just creating it and running a command to directly configure it with my servers. It supports unlimited use, and charges are applied based on the file usage at the end of the month. The solution offers reduced downtime and increased durability through its auto-scaling features.
We can expand our storage on-the-fly without the need to reprovision
Ease of provisioning: It's very easy to consume the product. We are not doing this manually. We are doing this programmatically, but it's very easy and seamless for us to consume it. It's like any other Azure component. It's very good and well-integrated into the ecosystem of Azure. There is tight integration. We didn't need to learn anything new. It feels like we know everything already, although under the hood, the product is something totally different. However, it seemed very easy for us. It's elastic, so it scales with our demands. We can start small, then with the addition of customer loads, we can expand on-the-fly without the need to reprovision something. The performance is quite good, so it's almost on par with the make of SSD storage. It provides a quick, scalable storage solution. We were looking for a supported solution. We didn't want to experiment. We didn't want to look for open source, though we did look into open source initially before we bumped into NetApp. We figured out that adding yet another unknown into our system was not going to bring us benefit. It would be another problem that we would need to tackle. So, we said, "Okay, let's look for a supported solution," and NetApp was one of them. Then, we turned to NetApp.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most beneficial feature of the product for data storage stems from the fact that it serves as a shared file storage."
"Elastic File Systems allow me to share data, provision, and manage capacity and performance in AWS."
"The first valuable thing is it is scalable."
"Its elasticity and flexible pricing are the most valuable. For Amazon EFS, you are charged based on the storage. It is also very fast and stable with a very simple and intuitive interface."
"Elastic File Systems allow me to share data, provision, and manage capacity and performance in AWS."
"Amazon EFS is extremely stable, as it is managed by AWS."
"The solution is scalable."
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"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."
"It is faster. It is quicker. It is reliable."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"This solution definitely makes us more efficient in being able to provide storage quickly to our customers in the Azure Cloud."
"Its security and ease of use are most valuable."
"We use Azure NetApp Files mainly for backup."
 

Cons

"The product's stability has some shortcomings where improvements are required."
"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."
"It could be better in connecting with Windows Server instances."
"Elastic File Systems can be expensive due to the nature of data transfer costs, using services like SSTP, and potentially being costly in a rate-shift context."
"The platform's connectivity could be improved to be more comparable to S3 buckets, which offer better API availability."
"I don't have notes on improvements."
"EFS could be improved by including a one-click setup."
"Amazon EFS is more costly compared to other storage options available from AWS."
"We would like for the files which are coming in that we can version them. 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."
"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."
"Azure NetApp Files is expensive."
"We would like to see more paired regions for the replication."
"The pricing definitely needs to be improved."
"I don’t like the solution’s configuration and support."
"We would like to have backup functionality built-in so that we don't run into the issue where the replication process makes a copy of the corrupted data."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) offers a pay-as-you-go model, so whenever you use its services, you need to pay."
"The product charges are based on the amount of data stored."
"The solution's price is mid-ranged."
"The main challenge with EFS is its cost, which is slightly higher compared to EBS or S3. For one GB or ten GB of data, S3 is much cheaper. EFS could cost around $30 to $50 per month for similar usage."
"I would rate the pricing 7 out of 10."
"The product's price depends on the services and the size and capacity at which it is used in a business environment."
"It has flexible pricing. You are charged based on your storage."
"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."
"Our pricing has not been determined because we are still waiting on additional features."
"The price of Azure NetApp Files could be better."
"We are currently on a pay-as-you-go model with the storage that we use."
"The pricing depends on your scaling and consumption."
"The licensing fees for this solution vary, ranging from a single shelf to a full suite."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."
"It is expensive in small environments, which could be better. The reason is the four terabyte minimum. A one terabyte minimum would be better."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Storage solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
33%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which file storage system is better - Amazon EFS (elastic file storage) or Azure File Storage?
Amazon EFS is easy to set up: you can use the AWS management console, API, or command-line. Amazon EFS can grow to petabytes and deliver consistent low latencies and high levels of throughput. This...
What do you like most about Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)?
The product's initial setup phase is easy, as per the configurations.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)?
Amazon EFS is more costly compared to other storage options available from AWS.
How does Azure NetApp Files compare to NetApp ONTAP?
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 ...
What do you like most about Azure NetApp Files?
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 ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure NetApp Files?
The solution's competitors like Oracle or Amazon are not cheap either. I think we're paying two million dollars for Azure NetApp Files. On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is exp...
 

Also Known As

No data available
NetApp ANF, ANF
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Arcesium, Atlassian, Seeking Alpha, Zend
SAP, Restaurant Magic
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Azure NetApp Files and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.