We performed a comparison between Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and IBM FlashSystem based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NAS solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes."
"Pure has signature security technology, which cannot be deleted, even if you are an administrator."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"The solution is very straightforward to set up."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"The initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward."
"What I really like about this program, is that it is easy to use and easy to configurate."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use."
"The biggest benefit of the Hitachi platform is 100 percent storage uptime. It's also highly cost-effective."
"One of the features, for us, that is important is the monitoring platform integrated into the solution. It has all the elements that we need to see, at all times, to be sure the platform is working right."
"It's best features are its reliability and stability."
"The active-active option seemed to be working well and overall, it was a solid product."
"The high performance of flash storage is especially valuable to us."
"The setup is very easy to manage and configure. The initial setup and takes one hour more or less."
"In terms of performance and ability, the product can stand up against its competitors since the solution offers two controller systems to users."
"The first thing that attracted this model to us was the non-disruptive migration. We had a very large database application that was on older gear and needed to be migrated to these arrays. We had experience with virtualizing behind an array and moving applications and data but this made it even better."
"They have a virtualization feature and, even if you do not want to buy that feature, you can have it as a trial for two to three months. If you have another brand of storage from another company, you can use this tool to transfer all your data from the old system to the new Storwize system, which really shortens the migration time."
"When it comes to the interface of the solution we did not encounter any challenges. Additionally, the solution has good documentation."
"IBM's technical support do excellent work."
"The compression and deduplication features are the most valuable."
"The most valuable features are flexibility and performance."
"FlashSystem offers proven technology in a compact package."
"Stability-wise, this solution is fine."
"Most of the features for the reduction in data compression are useful. It is also very easy to use and administer. Its performance is also good."
"We would like to see VNC integration or be able to use Pure Storage with VNC."
"Our use cases require more multi-tenant capabilities and additional VLAN interfaces for separating different customers. We currently use it to provide storage, sometimes shared storage, to different customers, but it is less flexible in comparison to a dedicated solution."
"We have run into a couple of instances recently where we are running out of space. So we have had to buy some more packs for it and they have deployed fine and it has increased smoothly."
"We've seen that when we create a POD in synchronous mode, it increases the latency."
"Right now, the box itself is just strictly working as a backend storage system. It would be fantastic if we could access it directly like a NAS device through network access or SIS drives. I think they have an interface, but I am not sure how good it is. If we could address a box directly on the network without having to go through a server, it would be great. The replication schemas could be improved. We are not using replication on the storage level right now. We use a different type of replication. If their replication would be as good as the one that we have, I would probably run the replication schema because it might be faster, but I don't know that for a fact. So, I cannot say that they have good replication. All I can say is that they need to inform us better."
"The software layer has to improve."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"The tool's portfolio is minimal. It is expensive."
"The initial setup was difficult, as we don't have access to assistance. We had some issues around configuration. We needed to know things like what kind of rate is the best, or what kind of replication is ideal. We had to seek out answers online to get the information we needed."
"They should look at the cost because there are other vendors who offer the same cost with more features."
"For the support windows to work, maybe they have to upgrade the firmware of the VSP. They changed the hardware or the disk. I don't know if it was the port blade they changed or a VM for a memory cache. Also, replacing the old target with the processor target would be fine. The old equipment is very easy to manage, and I don't have any bad commentary."
"The complex setup phase is an area where improvements are needed."
"The complex setup, ease of use, and snapshot operations of this product need to be improved."
"In the next version I would like to see additional features like artificial intelligence and an increase in the amount of data it can store."
"In the next version I would like to see more intelligence."
"The embedded management for installation feature has neither simplified nor complicated the management process, therefore, there is room for improvement."
"The customer's expectations are what they get on the cloud, they're expecting even in the on-premises deployments, going forward."
"When you provision a datastore auto-format takes a long time"
"The solution is quite expensive. That's one of the downsides to using it."
"IBM FlashSystems is lagging in optimizing storage technologies."
"Our customers have raised concerns about the limitations of the FlashSystem 5200 and 7300, which only offer a 32-gigabyte connection."
"The basic setup can be challenging when it comes to certain IP addresses and the configuration of the IP. You have to go in to different menus to makes changes and ensure it is stable."
"Events/log analysis tools."
"The ease of installation should be improved. We had issues with the configuration model."
More Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is ranked 5th in NAS with 48 reviews while IBM FlashSystem is ranked 4th in NAS with 106 reviews. Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is rated 8.4, while IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform writes "Leverages a 3DC architecture with VSP for disaster recovery, offering a 100% data availability guarantee". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is most compared with Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, Dell Unity XT, Huawei OceanStor Dorado and Pure Storage FlashArray, whereas IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Dell Unity XT, NetApp AFF and Huawei OceanStor Dorado. See our Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform vs. IBM FlashSystem report.
See our list of best NAS vendors, best Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) vendors, and best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all NAS reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.