We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe and Pure Storage FlashArray based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two All-Flash Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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 solution is very straightforward to set up."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"One of the best features is the support, which is excellent."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and performance."
"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."
"The solution is scalable."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use."
"IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is one of the leading storage systems in the world...I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is the speed."
"IBM FlashSystem provides the same software on each box, including virtualized solutions."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its upgrades, as we don't have to do much homework because of its different controllers."
"The solution is more available for IOPS warehousing, resolving issues, and reporting than other products."
"Good performance with a user-friendly UI."
"The high performance and high availability improved our overall processes."
"IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is easy to use and comes with good performance."
"The speed is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"We're getting good performance, and the compression ratio is also very good in Pure Storage FlashArray."
"It helps simplify storage. When you're running Pure all-flash, you don't have to do a lot of the old Oracle best practices. You don't have to worry about putting log files on a different disk channel than the data files, and those types of issues... That has made it vastly easier to do large volumes, rapid provisioning in databases, without taking a performance hit."
"The compression and deduplication features help to make the best use of the capacity."
"The top-tier support and reliable storage are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The tool has reduced our power consumption."
"The performance is very good."
"The initial setup was really straight forward."
"The tool's portfolio is minimal. It is expensive."
"We would like to see more visibility into garbage collection and CPU performance in the GUI."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in catering to midrange storage needs, especially for customers seeking Enterprise-class features."
"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."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this 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."
"I'd like to see the product implement active replication for vehicles such as VMware."
"I would like to have replication functionality built directly in the product, rather than having to use a separate device for this."
"In the future, the limitation is upgrading the same storage by adding a shelf to the desk. There is a limitation in the backend connection between the storage and extended shelf."
"The storage system itself should have built-in capabilities for different ransomware attacks."
"The pricing should be more competitive."
"The support could be better."
"IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is currently at the end of its lifespan and will soon become obsolete in the markets."
"IBM is currently not offering volume-based encryption or compression, while other brands or IBM's competitors are doing it."
"The ZIO interface could be improved."
"The internal garbage collection process has been fixed recently in some OS updates so it is more efficient but that could be just a little better."
"There are scenarios with very specific functionality around VMware integration particularly to do with the way we'd like to manage LUNs in VMware. The tools are pretty good but there's room for improvement there."
"A year ago they promised that they would be able to read through the database encryption with more metric and they have not delivered on that patch, which is significant because it gives us back so much more storage room. We want to be able to read through the encryption."
"We would like to see more development on their Copy Automation Tool (CAT) for Oracle, as well as better integration for our customers running Oracle VM."
"The GUI is simplistic and basic. I feel like it's explanatory, but not enough, it needs a little more to it."
"We did have one hiccup with the integration of vCenter. When we were installing Pure Storage, we were using vCenter 6.7, which defaults to the HTML5 Web Client. The current plugin for Pure Storage doesn't show up in that client at all. You have to go and use the legacy FlexFlash client to see the Pure Storage plugin in vCenter."
"I would rate this solution an eight. To make it a ten it would have to be a little cheaper."
"I recognize it's a difficult challenge, but I would like to see them make the pricing more reasonable."
IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is ranked 13th in All-Flash Storage with 19 reviews while Pure Storage FlashArray is ranked 3rd in All-Flash Storage with 174 reviews. IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is rated 8.8, while Pure Storage FlashArray is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe writes "Steady performance, responsive support, and high availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashArray writes "Effective provisioning, helpful support, and reliable". IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, IBM FlashSystem and HPE Primera, whereas Pure Storage FlashArray is most compared with Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, HPE Nimble Storage, IBM FlashSystem and VMware vSAN. See our IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe vs. Pure Storage FlashArray 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.