We performed a comparison between DDN IntelliFlash and Tintri VMstore 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, Tintri VMstore came out ahead of DDN IntelliFlash, as our reviewers found DDN IntelliFlash more difficult to deploy, more expensive, and requiring improvement in its support.
"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 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 most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"The initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and performance."
"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 has good, reliable, fast storage."
"The standout features for us in Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its robust DDoS protection, seamless transparent failover, and failback capabilities ensuring high availability."
"It provides a combination of all the protocols that you need, without losing deduplication and compression."
"High performance and ease-of-management are the most valuable features."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"Data Compression: Up to 80% space reduction in the database"
"It has reduced our electricity usage by reducing the amount of disks needed for the virtual environment."
"EasyTier/hotcaching: Valuable because it allows greater performance than standard SAS disks"
"It performed great originally, and when it performed great, it was awesome."
"It's very fast. We were seeing read latencies of less than one millisecond. It is robust."
"Simplicity of installation and management, high IOPS, management per VM, QoS, power and space saving."
"The Deduplication feature in VDI environments. If Tintri says we can host 3000 VMs in our storage, I know we can host 3000 VMs there. Believe the results."
"Support from our vendor and Tintri are brilliant. They have always answered all of our questions promptly."
"We love the real-time replication, ease of use when connecting our servers to the storage, and the level of redundancy inside the box... It's also simple software and integrates well with VMware so we get a lot of information about all of the VMs, how they're performing individually, and about network latency. That's very helpful when you're troubleshooting a slowdown."
"It has easy setup, easy administration, and no LUNs!"
"The management dashboards keep improving and allow for quick and easy tracing of issues."
"The data encryption feature adds a valuable security enhancement with no impact on performance."
"The ease and use and the great performance are why we went with our 2nd Tintri VMstore."
"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 tool's portfolio is minimal. It is expensive."
"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 the pricing of the product."
"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."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"In the future, I would like to see integration with enterprise backup systems."
"I'd like to see the product implement active replication for vehicles such as VMware."
"Performance is horrible now. Our original intent was to buy new storage in about two years. But since it became a critical urgency for us, we decided to purchase a new one in two or three months."
"They need to offer better integration for a virtual platform to enable you to create hyper-converged solution."
"Technical support is bad. It'd grade them at 30% or 40%. The response time is terrible."
"We had just one small stability problem with power flapping and it did not start up again automatically. We had to access service ports and manually restart the storage processors."
"It's somewhat scalable, but maybe not so much as some of the competition."
"In the proxy section you can’t choose a user account and password, so it is not allowed at the moment to go out, if customer has such constellation."
"It only keeps one hour of real-time data without the ability to do deep analysis of each element."
"Snapshots are not as easy to access as on a NetApp device."
"More cloud integration."
"Technical support is an area where we had several issues, and it was hard to get some support in a specific case we had. I'm not very satisfied with them."
"In sync and automated mirror between two Tintris is missing."
"What I feel would be nice, in terms of a wishlist, is scalability. Rather than replacing the whole appliance, I would like to be able to just add another unit and scale it like that."
"The Tintri Analytics site is excellent for long-term trending, but more data would be great."
"The product could be improved by adding iSCSI support. We have had to rethink how we implement some of our services due to this."
"Tintri need to be able to innovate faster but maintain the quality of their features."
"It would be beneficial if Tintri could identify issues through telemetry and notify us before we need to contact them."
Earn 20 points
DDN IntelliFlash is ranked 29th in All-Flash Storage with 11 reviews while Tintri VMstore T7000 is ranked 15th in All-Flash Storage with 61 reviews. DDN IntelliFlash is rated 7.4, while Tintri VMstore T7000 is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of DDN IntelliFlash writes "Good features with an easy initial setup but technical support is slow ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tintri VMstore T7000 writes "We were able to push a button—it really is that simple—and flip primary and secondary storage locations". DDN IntelliFlash is most compared with VAST Data, Pure Storage FlashArray and NetApp AFF, whereas Tintri VMstore T7000 is most compared with Pure Storage FlashArray, Dell PowerStore, HPE Nimble Storage, VMware vSAN and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI).
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.
