We performed a comparison between NetApp NVMe AFF A800 and VAST Data 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."Offers excellent features like efficient data reduction, a reliable SafeMode, and a great support model for continuous assistance and updates."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes."
"The solution is scalable."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use."
"It has benefited my organization because it has reduced time to insights."
"It is very easy to install and configure. It has got excellent diagnostics. If you really need to see how the box is performing, the console gives you a lot of information. You can set thresholds as well as alerts based on the thresholds, which is a very powerful functionality. They are very proactive. They know how to monitor and manage the systems. They see a problem, and they are all over it before us. They see the problem before we see it, which is very good."
"The product can be scaled vertically as well as horizontally."
"You can easily scale up, and scale-out."
"During the use cases of the solution, its reliability and suitability are the best."
"Low latency is the most valuable feature."
"NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is easier to use than some other solutions and the UI is very good to use for day-to-day activities. Overall, the solution has good technology."
"The storage features are valuable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a product that is fast and provides a fast I/O."
"We find the product to be very flexible."
"The solution is useful for machine learning and scientific applications, including computer simulations."
"This has been one of the most reliable storage systems that I have ever used."
"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."
"It is on the expensive side."
"In the next release, I would like to see real-time analytics for further insight into consumption models."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"I want to see Pure Storage not only be for fast storage, but I want to see it be for the entire data center."
"In the future, I would like to see integration with enterprise backup systems."
"The UI for this solution needs to be improved."
"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 technical support has room for improvement."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The product's performance has some shortcomings, making it an area that could be a little better."
"The product’s UI could be better."
"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."
"The cost of the solution is quite high. It would be ideal if they could adjust it so that it's a but less."
"Stability is an area with a certain shortcoming where the solution needs to improve"
"The write performance could be improved because it is less than half of the read performance."
"The read/write ratio is an area in the solution with some flaws and needs improvement."
NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is ranked 7th in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays with 10 reviews while VAST Data is ranked 8th in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays with 2 reviews. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is rated 8.8, while VAST Data is rated 10.0. The top reviewer of NetApp NVMe AFF A800 writes "Very easy to manage, highly stable and offers robustness of the CLI, API, and GUI ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VAST Data writes "Stability-wise, a device that has been up and running for years". NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Huawei OceanStor Dorado, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, NetApp ASA and Dell PowerMax NVMe, whereas VAST Data is most compared with Pure Storage FlashBlade, NetApp AFF, Pure Storage FlashArray, Qumulo and Dell PowerScale (Isilon). See our NetApp NVMe AFF A800 vs. VAST Data 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.
