No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

HPE Data Fabric vs IBM Netezza Performance Server comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 2026

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

HPE Data Fabric
Ranking in Hadoop
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM Netezza Performance Server
Ranking in Hadoop
6th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Data Warehouse (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Hadoop category, the mindshare of HPE Data Fabric is 10.5%, down from 15.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Netezza Performance Server is 6.1%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Hadoop Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
HPE Data Fabric10.5%
IBM Netezza Performance Server6.1%
Other83.4%
Hadoop
 

Featured Reviews

Hamid M. Hamid - PeerSpot reviewer
Data architect at Banking Sector
A stable and scalable tool that serves as a great database
The initial setup of HPE Ezmeral Data Fabric is easy. I am not sure how long it took to deploy HPE Ezmeral Data Fabric, but I haven't heard about any disadvantages when it comes to the time taken for the deployment. I remember that one of our company's clients who had purchased the product never mentioned the product's setup phase being complex. One of the drawbacks with HPE Ezmeral Data Fabric stems from the fact that the product's upgrade was not straightforward, and it was a complex process since one of the teams in my company who deals with the tool found the upgrade part to be tough. The solution is deployed on an on-premises model. My company has two dedicated staff members to look after the deployment and maintenance phases of HPE Ezmeral Data Fabric.
Shiv Subramaniam Koduvayur - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Manager at MAF Retail
Parallel data processing streamlines operations while cost and cloud integration challenge adoption
The cost of the solution is on the more expensive side, which is a concern for me. Additionally, its promotion and interaction with cloud applications are limited. The cloud version is only available in AWS, and in the Middle East, it is not well-developed in the Azure environment. For the cost to be reduced, it should match competitors. Many features need to be incorporated on the cloud.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Outside of human error, MapR is probably the most stable of the major releases."
"My first choice is MapR, as it is more adaptable to different contexts, and it could be customized in some way to fit the different needs, and this is my first choice and my first advice to people who ask me about this particular platform."
"My customers find the product cheaper compared to other solutions. The previous solution that we used did not have unified analytics like the runtime or the analog."
"This product enabled us opening up endless possibilities in data analytics, IOE/IOT, and predictive analysis."
"The fact that the heavy computation is required on Big Data can be distributed across many nodes in a cluster, makes this solution a winner."
"Our customer purchased a paid support service and so far MapR has addressed our issues well."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"I highly recommend MapR."
"We have sub-second query performance, and users are happy with the product."
"With a field-programmable gate array, it has the capabilities to do arithmetic calculations at memory level."
"Data compression. It was relatively impressive; I think at some point we were getting 4:1 compression if not more."
"The performance of the solution is its most valuable feature; the solution is easy to administer as well, very user-friendly, and on the technical side the architecture is simple to understand and you do not need too many administrators to handle the solution."
"Query and process response times have improved resulting in customers being able to process and analyse more in less time."
"Distribution (no index or partition), built-in analytics is a major advantange."
"The speed has been excellent for us, in pulling information, as well as the batch timing, and the suite of tools that comes with it for the ETL with IBM InfoSphere."
"Distribution concurrency control."
 

Cons

"It would be nice to have new developments in the Apache space (Spark, Storm, etc.)."
"Installations and setups are still a bit cryptic and can be improved."
"The product is not user-friendly."
"The interface part, what I'm calling the integration part, could be improved."
"It'd like to see file system auditing, data encryption, and certification of other vendors' tools."
"The UI for administration still has a lot of manual work to set up the cluster and get it running."
"One weakness for MapR is the Kerberos support."
"Upgrading Ezmeral to a new version is a pain. They're trying to make the solution more container-friendly, so I think they're going in the right direction. The only problem we've had in the past was the upgrades. The process isn't smooth due to how the Red Hat operating system upgrades currently work."
"Support for interfaces has been poor."
"IBM Netezza Performance Server could improve its interface, support for big data, and APA-based connectivity should be available."
"Netezza does not scale like other databases, so it cannot run several queries at once."
"Oracle Exadata's security features, like TDE encryption, are missing in IBM Netezza Performance Server."
"Data lineage on column or even object level does not exist, therefore external applications have to be used"
"We are not able to scale. The only way to scale is to get another appliance, but we have a customers who would need us to hydrate the data between the two appliances, and Netezza does not do that."
"I am using SAS and it's a dis-appointment due to limited in-DB processing, including data connection pool, that was never resolved by both SAS and IBM Netezza."
"In-DB processing with SAS Analytics, since this is supposed to be an analytics server so the expectation is there."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's price is cheap and based on a usage basis. The solution's licensing costs are yearly and there are no extra costs."
"There is a need for my company to pay for the licensing costs of the solution."
"HPE is flexible with you if you are an existing customer. They offer different models that might be beneficial for your organization. It all depends on how you negotiate."
"Netezza is a costly solution. It does serve a specific purpose but it's costlier than what's available in the market, if you go to the cloud."
"For me, mainly, it reduces my costs. It's not only the appliance cost. There are also support costs and a maintenance costs. It does reduce the costs very drastically."
"The pricing is very expensive. It has a lot CPUs with a lot of components in it. It also has built-in redundancy for resiliency reasons."
"The annual licensing fees are twenty-two percent of the product cost."
"The solution has a yearly licensing fee, and users have to pay extra for support."
"Expensive to maintain compared to other solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Hadoop solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user232068 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Data Architect at a pharma/biotech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Aug 5, 2015
Netezza vs. Teradata
Original published at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/should-i-choose-net Two leading Massively Parallel Processing (MPP) architectures for Data Warehousing (DW) are IBM PureData System for Analytics (formerly Netezza) and Teradata. I thought talking about the similarities and differences…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Construction Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Healthcare Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise33
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with IBM Netezza Performance Server?
The cost of the solution is on the more expensive side, which is a concern for me. Additionally, its promotion and interaction with cloud applications are limited. The cloud version is only availab...
What advice do you have for others considering IBM Netezza Performance Server?
The solution has generally received positive feedback from me and is recommended for continued use by end users. However, the product cost is high compared to others in the market, and this cost ha...
 

Also Known As

MapR, MapR Data Platform
Netezza Performance Server, Netezza, Netezza Analytics
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Valence Health, Goodgame Studios, Pico, Terbium Labs, sovrn, Harte Hanks, Quantium, Razorsight, Novartis, Experian, Dentsu ix, Pontis Transitions, DataSong, Return Path, RAPP, HP
Seattle Childrens Hospital, Carphone Warehouse, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Battelle, Start Today Co. Ltd., Kelley Blue Book, Trident Marketing, Elisa Corporation, Catalina Marketing, iBasis, Barnes & Noble, Qualcomm, MediaMath, Acxiom, iBasis, Foxwoods
Find out what your peers are saying about HPE Data Fabric vs. IBM Netezza Performance Server and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.