01
Like-for-like evaluation
Compare integration scope and operations, not feature checklists both sides tick.
Compare
FusioNative vs Rafay
Rafay is a GPU PaaS and Kubernetes orchestration platform for neoclouds, telcos and enterprises, with multi-tenancy, a developer self-service hub, SKU management, GPU sharing, token metering and chargeback export. FusioNative is Cloud Management Software that delivers the same cloud-operations layer together with the infrastructure services beneath it: KubeVirt VMs, Ceph storage, Cilium networking, model serving, security and observability.
Last updated · Fusionative
Category frame
Rafay · GPU PaaS and Kubernetes orchestration for operators
Both productize GPU capacity as cloud services. Choose Rafay when you want an orchestration layer over infrastructure and partners you have already chosen, or a vendor-hosted controller. Choose FusioNative when you want one self-hosted suite from storage and networking up to the tenant catalog.
Ownership split
Own the depth. Own the cloud.
They own infrastructure depth. You own the cloud operating model. Use this frame in evaluations, not feature-by-feature checklists.
01
Rafay typically owns
- GPU PaaS for operators: SKUs, GPU sharing (passthrough, MIG, time-slicing), self-service Developer Hub
- Token Factory for metered model APIs (GA 2026)
- SaaS and self-hosted controllers, including air-gapped
- NVIDIA AI Cloud-Ready validation and a published NVIDIA reference architecture
- Partner ecosystem across storage, networking and OEMs
02
FusioNative typically owns
- Integrated infrastructure services: Ceph, Cilium, KubeVirt
- Cloud layer: tenancy, catalog, quotas, metering, chargeback
- Model serving with vLLM, SGLang, NVIDIA NIM and Ollama on NVIDIA and AMD
- Shield security, Observe and FinOps in one suite
Detailed comparison
Rafay and FusioNative, side by side.
Category and operating-model differences. Use this table in evaluations instead of checkbox spam.
| Dimension | Rafay | FusioNative |
|---|---|---|
| Primary category | GPU PaaS and Kubernetes / VM / Slurm orchestration over existing infrastructure. | Cloud Management Software including the infrastructure services beneath the cloud layer. |
| Multi-tenancy and catalog | Documented: tenants, Developer Hub self-service, SKUs and quotas. | Organizations, projects, self-service catalog and quotas. |
| Metering and billing | Usage and token metering with chargeback export to the provider's billing system. | Metering of GPU-hours by GPU model, rate cards, commitments, budgets and monthly invoices. |
| Storage and networking | Integrates partner storage and networking. | Ceph storage and Cilium networking ship with the suite. |
| Control plane | SaaS, self-hosted managed, or self-hosted customer-managed (including air-gapped). | Self-hosted on your estate, including air-gapped. |
| Licensing (public info) | Subscription per node or cluster with volume tiers; list prices not published. | Editions from Community to Enterprise; pricing on request. |
Decision guide
When to choose whom.
Honest selection criteria. The right answer is often layered coexistence.
01
Choose Rafay when
- You already chose storage, networking and OEM partners and want an orchestration layer above them.
- You want a vendor-hosted SaaS controller.
- NVIDIA AI Cloud-Ready validation is a procurement requirement.
02
Choose FusioNative when
- You want one suite from storage and networking up to the tenant catalog.
- You need sovereign or air-gapped operation with the full stack self-hosted.
- You run VMs, containers and GPU services side by side.
Differentiators
Where FusioNative is usually evaluated
Commercial and architectural axes, not a checkbox war.
evaluation axes
01
Storage (Ceph)
Storage (Ceph), networking (Cilium) and VMs (KubeVirt) in the same suite
02
Four platforms from one product
Four platforms from one product: AI Cloud, NEO Cloud, Sovereign, Air-gapped
03
Self-hosted control plane by design
Self-hosted control plane by design, including offline installs
04
Security (Shield)
Security (Shield), observability and FinOps as suite products
Architecture
Coexistence, not false replacement.
The two overlap heavily at the cloud-operations layer, so most operators choose one. Evaluations should compare tenancy models, metering units, integrated layers and total cost at the target node count.
- Rafay's strength is orchestration breadth and partner integrations.
- FusioNative's strength is integration depth from infrastructure to catalog.
- Both support air-gapped deployment; compare upgrade and licensing processes offline.
Buyer outcomes
What a good evaluation produces.
Rafay and FusioNative both turn GPU estates into cloud services. Rafay leads with orchestration and partners; FusioNative leads with one self-hosted suite that includes the infrastructure layers.
02
Fewer vendors
Where FusioNative fits, storage, networking and the cloud layer come from one supplier.
Ask in the room
Evaluation questions that keep the category honest.
Use these in RFPs, architecture reviews, and executive briefings.
01
Q1
Which layers must the platform include, and which will partners supply?
02
Q2
Where must the control plane run, and who operates it?
03
Q3
Which metering units do we bill on, and how do they reach our billing system?
04
Q4
Which tenancy model do untrusted customers get?
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Do Rafay and FusioNative do the same thing?
They overlap at the cloud-operations layer: tenancy, self-service, quotas and metering. FusioNative also ships the storage, networking and VM layers; Rafay integrates partners for those.
Which supports air-gapped deployment?
Both. Rafay documents an air-gapped self-hosted controller, and FusioNative supports fully offline installs.
How are they priced?
Rafay publishes a per-node or per-cluster subscription model without list prices. FusioNative offers editions from Community to Enterprise, with pricing on request.
Next step
Bring this framing into a live architecture review.
Book a demo with your estate context, or return to the compare hub for the other stacks.