We performed a comparison between HPE StoreOnce and HPE 3PAR StoreServ based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, HPE 3PAR StoreServ came out ahead of HPE StoreOnce. Even though both products have similar deployment difficulties, price range, and support quality, HPE StoreOnce has fewer valuable features than HPE 3PAR StoreServ.
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe will quickly overcome all the hurdles you face, including network and latency issues."
"The most valuable features of Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its superior performance compared to other flash tiers, as well as its ease of use, with an intuitive user interface that is simple to deploy and use."
"The duplication algorithm allows us to get a lot more use out of less storage. We're running a five terabyte array right now and we're running probably about 30 terabytes on it. So the duplication rate is pretty phenomenal, without a cost to performance. It still runs pretty smoothly."
"Offers excellent features like efficient data reduction, a reliable SafeMode, and a great support model for continuous assistance and updates."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and performance."
"The latency is good."
"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."
"The solution has increased our performance by about 40 percent."
"The deduplication is pretty impressive because it will shrink. We also do some clones in addition to the snapshots, where we can have multiple clones. These reduce the actual written storage by as much as 50 percent."
"It all works in concert using Recovery Manager Central (RMC). HPE coordinates it all, so it is more of a solution instead of products trying to do things together."
"The solution is quite stable and scalable."
"This is a very robust product and it offers everything that we are looking for."
"It's a really stable solution. We have no problems with the customer, no negative feedback from them on this."
"We have had it for about two years and had zero problems with it."
"I benefit from the HPE Call Home feature. It tells me about any issue once I have it."
"The hardware is strong and all the equipment has a good infrastructure. Personally, I think it's the best storage product in HPE for small to medium-sized businesses."
"The solution's licensing policy is more practical and not confusing."
"This is a user-friendly solution."
"The scalability is very good."
"HPE StoreOnce is an easy-to-use tool."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its catalyst mode, along with better performance, backup, and recovery."
"The initial setup is simple."
"It's easy to backup data, manage. A"
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"It is on the expensive side."
"Every time I think of something that needs to improve, they're one step ahead, which I love. The only area I wish to see improve, I believe is coming, is in the FlashBlade product. Blade implementation fell short on a few of the services."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"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."
"We would like to see more visibility into garbage collection and CPU performance in the GUI."
"In the next release, I would like to see real-time analytics for further insight into consumption models."
"The solution could be improved in regard to space reclamation by adding automation."
"It's a little bit difficult to figure out where the capacity is used. There is deduplication that, of course, saves space, but it sometimes it's hard to find out where the space is used. If you delete something, do you get it back? So it's not very transparent regarding capacity."
"The management console could use some work. All the functionality is there, of course, but it can be hard to find some features or do certain tasks."
"We would like to see better support for iSCSI."
"The solution could improve by being able to handle larger data."
"We have had some bad issues on stability."
"The availability of technical resources within HPE is becoming a challenge due to availability."
"Extending is not a problem, scalability is okay. But once you buy additional box of disks, you have to wait for HPE to contact you with their plan for implementation, for connecting, and it can take several weeks. So, you have the box and you have to wait for several weeks to actually implement it."
"When it comes to upgrading, it always goes block-wise. One block is 48 TB raw capacity. It would be good if they can include a smaller capacity for SMB customers. Currently, it is not possible to increase in a smaller capacity. You have to buy the exact same unit. It would be great if they can provide a smaller next block. There are around 20 hard disks, and it would be really helpful if we can add 10 hard disks initially and 10 hard disks later."
"The solution could always be less expensive."
"The solution's pricing could be improved."
"HPE StoreOnce needs to provide a SaaS solution by offering high-density disks."
"The platform's price could be lower."
"This product would be improved with the inclusion of more features to security or WORM."
"Agnostic backups."
"The solution must provide backup options for smaller capacities."
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 9th in All-Flash Storage with 299 reviews while HPE StoreOnce is ranked 2nd in Deduplication Software with 103 reviews. HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.6, while HPE StoreOnce is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of HPE 3PAR StoreServ writes "The product's technical support is outstanding as I can reach someone right away". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE StoreOnce writes "Helps to consolidate D2D backups and has a good deduplication ratio". HPE 3PAR StoreServ is most compared with HPE Primera, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, NetApp AFF and Pure Storage FlashArray, whereas HPE StoreOnce is most compared with Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), Dell PowerVault, ExaGrid EX Series, DD Boost and Veritas NetBackup. See our HPE 3PAR StoreServ vs. HPE StoreOnce report.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash Storage 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.