May2015

1. Investor Overview
Suresh Vasudevan, Chief Executive Officer
Anup Singh, Chief Financial Officer
May 26, 2015

2. Safe Harbor
2
This presentation and the accompanying oral presentation contain “forward-looking” statements that are based on our management’s beliefs and assumptions and on information currently
available to management. We intend for such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in the U.S. Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements include all statements other than statements of historical fact contained in this presentation, including information concerning our
financial outlook, business plans and objectives, potential growth opportunities, competitive position, industry environment and potential market opportunities.
Forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, assumptions and other factors including, but not limited to, those related to our future financial performance,
market acceptance of our solutions, our ability to increase sales of our solutions, including to attract and retain customers and to selling additional solutions to our existing customers, our ability
to develop new solutions and bring them to market in a timely manner, pricing pressure (as a result of competition or otherwise), our ability to maintain, protect and enhance our brand and
intellectual property, global economic conditions and our ability to continue to expand our business and manage our growth. Moreover, we operate in very competitive and rapidly changing
environments, and new risks may emerge from time to time. It is not possible for our management to predict all risks, nor can we assess the impact of all factors on our business or the extent to
which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements we may make. Further information on these and
other factors that could affect our financial results are included in our filings we make with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and may cause our actual results, performance or
achievements to differ materially and adversely from those anticipated or implied by our forward-looking statements.
You should not rely upon forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. Although our management believes that the expectations reflected in our forward-looking statements are
reasonable, we cannot guarantee that the future results, levels of activity, performance or events and circumstances described in the forward-looking statements will be achieved or occur.
Moreover, neither we, nor any other person, assume responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any
forward-looking statements for any reason after the date of this presentation to conform these statements to actual results or to changes in our expectations, except as required by law.
In addition to GAAP financial information, this presentation includes certain non-GAAP financial measures. The non-GAAP measures have limitations and you should not consider them in
isolation or as a substitute for our GAAP financial information. There are limitations to the use of non-GAAP measures. For example, bookings and free cash flow are not substitutes for
revenues or cash provided by operations. In addition, non-GAAP operating expenses exclude the impact of stock-based compensation expense, which is a recurring expense for us. See the
Appendix for a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to their nearest GAAP equivalent.

3. Founding Thesis
2013 TAM:
~$40B
1980s
DAS
1995+
Networked Storage
Opportunity for a ground-up redesign of storage
Today
Flash vs. Disk
Cloud vs. On-premise
Storage Management
3

4. Customer Challenge: Storage That Adapts To Application Needs
A platform that adapts as the relative merits of flash and disk evolve, and as workloads change
CRM
ERP
ERP
CRM
ERP
ERP
CRM
CRM
ERP
CRM
CRM
ERP
Deterministic
Latency < 1ms
Performance and Capacity
Within a Cost Envelope
Lowest Cost of Capacity
4

5. Industry Approach To Leveraging Flash Is Inadequate
Workloads
Mainstream Apps
Tiered
Hybrid
Arrays
Low cost
disk/cloud
Flash-Only Arrays
High-performance applications
Cheap and deep
Performance
Capacity
5

6. Nimble Approach To Leveraging Flash: Adaptive-Flash Platform
High Performance applications
Workloads
Mainstream Applications
Cheap and deep
Low Cost
Disk/Cloud
Performance
+Capacity
Adaptive-Flash
Platform
and
A ground-up design should efficiently and flexibly address performance and capacity intensive workloads
6

7. Data And Storage Management Costs Are Significant
7
Total Cost of Ownership
20%Upfront Capital
Expenditure
80%
§ Data protection and
data management
§ Storage monitoring
and support

8. D2D + Replication Snapshots + Replication
Primary
Backup
Disaster
Recovery
Nimble’s Approach Transforms Data Protection
Tier 3
(+Dedupe)
8
§ No backup window
§ Rapid local recovery
§ Cost-effective,
simple DR
No Tapes

9. Traditional Storage Management is Inefficient
!
#
!
#
!
#
!
#
!
#
? ??
With modern data analytics tools
can vendors predict and prevent
problems before they occur?
In a connected world why
can’t vendors proactively monitor
customer deployed systems?
Vendor
9

10. Nimble Approach To Storage Management
InfoSight Cloud-Based Management
Leveraging pervasive network connectivity and big data analytics to automate support and enable cloud-based management
Nimble Approach Customer Benefits
Comprehensive
Telemetry
Analysis and
Automation Storage Management
SaaS Offering
Proactive
Wellness
Community
Learning
10

11. Nimble’s Adaptive Flash Platform Value Proposition
11
CASL™
Flash-optimized file
system software
InfoSight™
Cloud-based
management/support
Nimble Adaptive Flash Platform
Rapid backup
and recovery
Non-disruptive, flexible
scaling to massive scale
Predictive support and
operational simplicity
Significantly better
performance/$ and capacity/$
Integrated ProtectionScale-to-Fit Ease of OperationsEfficiency

12. SmartStack Converged Infrastructure Solutions
12
SmartStack
Product Integration Collaborative Support Multiple Reference Architectures

13. 2013 TAM
~$40B
1980s
DAS
1995+
Networked Storage
Opportunity for a ground up redesign of storage
Today
Flash-Optimized Storage
Positioned to emerge as the market leader in storage by
delivering the next generation storage platform
Positioned To Lead In The Flash-Optimized Era

14. Illustrative Customer Case Studies

15. Customer Case Study: Transforming Storage Efficiency at a Large Bank
15
§ Storage costs were 30% of
the capital budget
§ Core project drivers:
• Performance scaling
• Storage budget
• Datacenter footprint
Challenges
§ 1.5x usable capacity and 50%
lower capital costs
§ 10x lower power and cooling costs
§ Dramatically simpler storage
management
Phase 1:
Exchange
½ Rack
6 Racks
§ 2.5x performance and 2x usable
capacity at much lower capital costs
§ 75% lower power and cooling costs
§ Dramatically simpler storage
management
Phase 2:
SQL
Databases
¾ Rack
3 Racks
Competitor Hybrid
Disk-Flash Solution
Nimble AdvantageNimbleVS.

16. Customer Case Study: Consolidation and Efficiency at Global Oil & Gas Leader
16
§ Global Energy leader with hundreds of
remote sites
§ Initial VDI project goal to consolidate
thousands of employee desktops at
hundreds of field locations
§ XenDesktop deployment with
incumbent storage experienced
serious performance issues, prompting
a competitive bake-off with Nimble
Challenges
§ Price-performance: 72% lower cost per
IOPS
§ Cost of capacity: 37% compression,
coupled with low-cost, Nearline HDDs
§ 50% lower recovery time for virtual PCs
§ Calls to help desk reduced dramatically
Nimble VDI Solution
§ 3000 VDI users
§ 64TB and 30K
IOPS on average
Nimble Expanded Use Cases
Phase 2: Exchange
§ 11,500 mailboxes
§ ~60TB used
§ HA across two data centers
Phase 3: ESX Farm
§ 600 VMs
§ Over 200 TBs across three
data centers

17. § Storage challenges in
meeting the needs of a high-
performance Vertica cluster
- Constant trade-off
between IO and capacity
- Adding nodes to support
storage was not cost
effective
- Lack of consolidated
provisioning and
management
- Data protection difficult for
separate storage pools
Challenges
§ Reduced cost by reducing the
number of required HP Vertica nodes
- Performance to meet the IO needs
of the analytics workload
- Scale-to-fit architecture allows for
separately scaling IO or capacity
§ Consolidated storage management
§ Nimble snapshots, clones and
replication improve data protection
and eliminate risk
Nimble AdvantageNimble Solution
Customer Case Study: Fortune 50 Telecommunications Company
17
§ Vertica cluster processing Billions
of events / hour
§ 170TB capacity
§ Hourly snapshots
for data protection

18. Customer Case Study: Leading Cloud Services Provider
18
§ Service Provider with
presence across the US
§ Core drivers:
• Datacenter consolidation
• Rapid provisioning
• Performance scaling
§ Large Telecom customer
with scaling challenges
prompted POC
Challenges
§ Much higher performance at
substantially lower capital costs:
§ Compression savings of 50% site-wide
§ High-density HDDs and more effective
use of flash optimize both performance
and capacity
§ Much simpler management and
faster on-boarding time
§ Current environment comprises over
600 TB (pre-compression) hosting
over 6000 VMs for hundreds of
customers and a variety of workloads
Nimble AdvantageNimble SmartStack
10G iSCSI 10G UCS
VMWare
+
Cisco
Nimble
+

19. § Nimble chosen as the platform
for all 11 sites
§ Each site protected with hourly
snapshots for rapid recovery
§ Data replicated between offices
for cost-effective and simple DR
§ Significant savings on storage and
bandwidth
Nimble Approach
Transforming Data Protection at a Global Consulting Firm
19
Boston
Data Center
Chicago
Data Center
9 Remote Sites
Inadequate data protection in
9 remote sites:
• Tapes for backup
• Offsite tape copies for disaster recovery
Aging storage infrastructure in
their main data centers:
Boston and Chicago
Challenges
Rethinking infrastructure at
all of their 11 sites

20. Compelling Value Proposition
Global Office Products Company
Competitor Solution
3 Racks of “Tier 1” storage
40TB Usable
Storage in 126U
Nimble Solution
2 Nimble arrays
59TB Usable
Storage in 6U
“Nimble has given us much more
flexibility with primary storage and data
protection and a much more resilient
infrastructure – all at a much lower
cost.”
—IT Platform Lead
§ SQL Server, SAP applications
and other VMs using traditional
“Tier 1” Storage
§ Core project drivers:
– Minimize data center
costs like power, cooling
– Reduce storage
capacity costs
– Reduce complexity
9X Reduction in Storage Costs
20X Reduction Footprint
50% Savings in Data Protection Costs
vs
Challenges
20

21. Compelling Value Proposition
Fortune 500 Engineering & Construction Company
Competitor Solution
§ 80% physical servers; EMC & NetApp SAN
§ Struggled with performance for Autonomy
e-discovery & Oracle data warehouse
§ Application backups taking over 10 hours
Challenges
Primary SAN: 2 Racks
Pre-Nimble Environment
Daily backup to tape
21
§ Performance up by 2X, despite using virtual servers
§ Data reduction of 2.3X lowers $/GB substantially
§ Snapshots -based backup eliminated backup window
§ Replication for DR
§ Power, cooling and space costs lower by $3,500/month
Nimble Advantage
Prod (Houston) DR (Austin)
DR with 90 days
of replicated
snapshots
Replication
Nimble SmartStack
§ 6U!
§ 110TB with 2.3X
data reduction
§ 30 days of
snapshots