We performed a comparison between Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and NetApp NVMe AFF A800 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The latency is good."
"It's incredibly easy to use and greatly simplified our ability to both deploy and manage our storage subsystems."
"The standout features for us in Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its robust DDoS protection, seamless transparent failover, and failback capabilities ensuring high availability."
"The Pure1 component is most valuable at this point in time when comparing it with EMC. Pure1 is where you can have your diagnostics in the cloud, so you can look at things from your mobile phone."
"The initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward."
"FlashArray has some fresh efficiency features. I've never seen a storage solution with a compression rating this high before. It's at least 4-to-1 on Oracle databases. It's the best flash storage for Oracle."
"It's helped us because we've changed fundamentally what we talk about. We don't talk about storage and different tiers of storage anymore nor do we talk about servers. We talk now about applications and how applications impact the business and end users."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"The biggest benefit of the Hitachi platform is 100 percent storage uptime. It's also highly cost-effective."
"The deduplication is useful for us because we don't have that much money for our lab infrastructure. Deduplication means we have more storage available. And the IOPS are really fast."
"The active-active option seemed to be working well and overall, it was a solid product."
"The service provided by Hitachi is good, and I get the IT support I need from the vendors."
"Its scalability and performance are the most valuable. It is quite scalable and has a huge capacity."
"The solution is very user-friendly in terms of maintenance and configuration. It's also possible to connect the solution to other storage management solutions."
"The setup is very easy to manage and configure. The initial setup and takes one hour more or less."
"The valuable features for data management include deduplication and compression without performance impact, and the ability to virtualize old storage, making migration seamless."
"The product can be scaled vertically as well as horizontally."
"The most valuable features are stability and performance."
"Over the eight years, we've been using NetApp with ONTAP, we've never lost a bit of data, and we've only experienced a few minutes of downtime in that entire time."
"Low latency is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a product that is fast and provides a fast I/O."
"You can easily scale up, and scale-out."
"During the use cases of the solution, its reliability and suitability are the best."
"We find the product to be very flexible."
"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."
"It's more multi-tenant functionality in their Pure1 manage portal that is lacking."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"The tool's portfolio is minimal. It is expensive."
"In the next release, I would like to see real-time analytics for further insight into consumption models."
"You cannot tag a LUN with a description, and that should be improved. What I like on the Unity side is that when I expand LUNs or do things, there is an information field on the LUN. This is the Information field that you can tag on your LUNs to let yourself know, "Hey, I've added this much space on this date". Pure lacks that ability. So, you don't have a mechanism that's friendly for tracking your data expansions on the LUN and for adding any additional information. That's a downside for me."
"In the future, I would like to see integration with enterprise backup systems."
"The embedded management for installation feature has neither simplified nor complicated the management process, therefore, there is room for improvement."
"The controllers in the product do not provide options for scalability."
"It seemed like every time we turned around it was a statement of work and we'd have to pay for something that our previous vendors would not have billed us for."
"They should look at the cost because there are other vendors who offer the same cost with more features."
"If they had a certain approach to layered storage, it would be better. For example, adaption to the browser, or having a centralized console."
"At the moment, I don't see any room for improvement in Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform G Series because my experience with the product is very good. The software is okay and you can manage the storage well. What I'd like to see in the next release of Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform G Series is for it to be a real NAS solution because right now, you need to use a Hitachi converter called HNAS which makes the process a little bit more expensive. In my opinion, Hitachi should look into the possibility of unifying the HNAS into full storage, meaning that the HNAS should be integrated into the Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform G Series."
"Not just anyone can do the deployment. So, the person needs a basic understanding and work experience."
"The complex setup phase is an area where improvements are needed."
"The product's performance has some shortcomings, making it an area that could be a little better."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"Increasing the RAM, and including physical cords would be beneficial."
"The initial setup should be easier, and more like a plug-and-play approach."
"The cost of the solution is quite high. It would be ideal if they could adjust it so that it's a but less."
"Sometimes, it takes a while to get somebody competent on the other end of the line. They do have engineers in multiple time zones around the world. However, their level-one support is not always the best."
"The support can take a few days to have a response. However, the response that we do receive is very informative."
More Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is ranked 4th in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays with 49 reviews while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is ranked 7th in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays with 10 reviews. Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is rated 8.4, while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is rated 8.8. 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 NetApp NVMe AFF A800 writes "Very easy to manage, highly stable and offers robustness of the CLI, API, and GUI ". Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is most compared with IBM FlashSystem, Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, Dell Unity XT and Huawei OceanStor Dorado, whereas NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Huawei OceanStor Dorado, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, NetApp ASA and Pure Storage FlashArray. See our Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 report.
See our list of best NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays vendors and best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays 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.
