We performed a comparison between Huawei OceanStor and IBM FlashSystem 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, IBM FlashSystem came out ahead of Huawei OceanStor. Although both products have valuable features, our reviewers found that Huawei OceanStor has complex licensing that can make the solution too expensive and needs to improve their tech support’s communication.
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reliability."
"We're able to get higher-density workloads on the same infrastructure, and we have a smaller physical footprint. The performance is excellent – during our test the bottlenecks are never on the X array, it just keeps picking up the pace to match what you need. The real-time visibility is a differentiator in my opinion."
"The solution is scalable."
"The high availability of the product is the most valuable feature."
"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."
"One of the best features is the support, which is excellent."
"The solution is very straightforward to set up."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"The solution works well for non-critical applications that do not require a heavy workload. The tool's all features are valuable."
"Huawei OceanStor has the capability of SSDs, high-performance disks, and higher disk support."
"The support is excellent."
"OceanStor can be used as NAS and SAN storage at the same time, with both file and block features in the same box."
"Huawei OceanStor is easy to manage."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The solution is scalable."
"If your virtual machine that resides on it completely fills the storage space, thanks to it's built-in function of all-zero data space reclamation, you just have to ask to System Engineer to run a zero-free on hosts (thin provisioned) and you will get more space instantaneously."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is SCM (Storage Class Memory), which has the lowest latency value in the storage industry."
"When it comes to the interface of the solution we did not encounter any challenges. Additionally, the solution has good documentation."
"The storage system is one of the best in the world."
"FlashSystem offers proven technology in a compact package."
"The initial setup was really straightforward. It was not complex. Deployment took one month, due to the data migration duration."
"The all-flash storage has tier replication capabilities."
"I like most of the features. Its speed, performance, and availability are valuable. We are implementing the data reduction technology the most."
"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."
"In the future, I would like to see integration with enterprise backup systems."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"The tool's pricing is higher than competitors."
"If the customer only needs 500 terabytes and doesn't care how much data they'll put in the server, IBM is cheaper than Pure."
"There is room for improvement in catering to midrange storage needs, especially for customers seeking Enterprise-class features."
"Efficiency improvements would always be welcome, but I'm not sure if they could get more efficient."
"The UI for this solution needs to be improved."
"We need better data deduplication."
"I would like to see more integration features with different platforms."
"The solution could improve by having better integration."
"The user interface is not so user friendly."
"The speed has room for improvement."
"The management is not a good feature in all of Huawei products. It's not easy or simple. Huawei has some problems with management and handling storage information from one interface."
"Its storage capacity could be better."
"Integration with mainstream solution technologies could be better."
"The main concern is regarding the usability of the data storage."
"GUI interface should be enhanced more as there is some issues in copy services."
"I would like to see bigger modules."
"The solution is not easy to implement. It takes a lot of time to study the product and it's a little complicated in general."
"Our model does not support compression or deduplication."
"The solution should improve its pricing and the mechanism in the reduction pool."
"The Data Reduction Pools (DRP) support could be better."
"IBM FlashSystems is lagging in optimizing storage technologies."
"It is slightly more expensive, however, it all depends on your supplier."
Huawei OceanStor is ranked 12th in All-Flash Storage with 32 reviews while IBM FlashSystem is ranked 6th in All-Flash Storage with 106 reviews. Huawei OceanStor is rated 8.4, while IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Huawei OceanStor writes "User-friendly and robust storage solution with good performance and easy setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". Huawei OceanStor is most compared with Huawei OceanStor Dorado, Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, Dell Unity XT and HPE Primera, whereas IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, Dell Unity XT and NetApp AFF. See our Huawei OceanStor vs. IBM FlashSystem 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.
