In order to manage fast-growing traffic to ensure optimal application performance in cost-effective ways, nowadays, enterprises are facing the problem of an increase in requirements for their data center and cloud architectures.
Following are the 5 key differences that make Citrix ADC a better choice for the data center and cloud architectures over F5.
1) TCO Reduction
ADCs use consolidation through device virtualization to address the inefficient utilization and high costs like problems.
F5 VIPRION is a chassis-based system that employs the benefits of ADC consolidation by using virtual Cluster Multi-processing (vCMP) technology. Whereas, in Citrix ADC, in order to consolidate existing ADCs in the network cost-effectively by the help of Citrix Networking SDX, and no feature or performance degradation is done.
Citrix Networking SDX dedicates critical system resources like SSL processing to each Citrix ADC instance where F5 ADC does not allow SSL processing to each guest.
2) HW Reduction without Downtime
F5’s vCMP clustering scheme uses multiple VIPRION blades together in order to scale out the system capacity but vCMP clustering has a capability of using only four or eight blades which limits the ability of the data center to optimize utilization by including all F5 ADC devices, this results in impairment of overall data center flexibility.
In comparison, Citrix ADC clustering is capable of clustering up to 32 physical or virtual appliances together. In Citrix ADC, a group of multiple appliances can be made transparently under a single virtual IP address (VIP) in order to make them work together simultaneously in support of one or more applications.
3) Enhanced Application Performance
F5 ADC uses Fast Path Virtual Server which is a dedicated high-speed technique with dedicated code to perform basic load balancing and other tasks. When the appliances are used in Fast Path, the F5 ADC gives almost 100% of rated specifications but most of the real-world implementations for ADCs use advanced packet processing like IPv6, SSL offload, cache and virtual server authentication for such tasks.
In contrast, Citrix ADC is up to 4.8 times the performance of F5’s BIG-IP when tested in real-world testing scenarios, as well as high performance and more features enabled
4) Aim to Deliver Application Instead of Programming
F5 strongly encourages BIG-IP and VIPRION customers in order to develop script-based iRules, even for content switching and load balancing policies, and the customer will have to adapt their policy definition and management processes by any means to fit the complex F5 iRules model which can cost administrator time for fixing simple problems.
On the other side, Citrix ADC uses a very simple approach that abstracts Citrix ADC’s whole underlying policy framework infrastructure, involving object model, APIs, and language syntax, which makes it easier for the administrator to state straight forward application delivery policies.
5) Enhanced User Experience
F5 ADC tools as less capable of exporting and analyzing application-aware historical data in standard formats for the analytics and also not capable of deconstructing ICA traffic.
Whereas the Citrix ADC combines network-based instrumentation efficiently that transforms historical data into useful information.
Conclusion
When it comes to choosing the ADC, it will definitely have a strong impact on the performance, scalability, and security of your entire application environment.
Citrix ADC is far better than F5 on the basis of most impacting and necessary capabilities as well as features. As your environment is growing unpredictably diverse and distributed, Citrix ADC improves your performance and helps you deliver a cost-efficient and more enhanced user experience along with high security. Ultimately Citrix offers better scalability and performance than the F5 Load Balancer.