We performed a comparison between Fungible Storage Cluster and Pure Storage FlashArray based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage."The initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to 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."
"The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes."
"The latency is good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and performance."
"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 most valuable features are that it is easy to implement and configure, easy to use, and really reliable."
"The console is simple to use. It has good performance. It is easy to install, understand, and manage, with a good ratio of deduplication and compression. It is doing its job."
"Their REST API is wonderful, well-documented, and easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray is the complete set of functions it provides."
"The stability of Pure Storage is very very good."
"The most valuable feature is that maintenance is free."
"Most of the problems that we had in the past with the performance in IOPS have disappeared. It has been a great improvement for our customers' services."
"It is fast and reliable. It works."
"It is easy to deploy and it's all-flash, so it's very fast."
"I'd like to see the product implement active replication for vehicles such as VMware."
"They could add more support for file storage and different types of storage."
"We would like to see VNC integration or be able to use Pure Storage with VNC."
"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."
"It is on the expensive side."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"The security and reporting could be improved."
"We would like to see more cloud support, which we know is coming, although it's not out yet. It's going to be released in the next versions. That would be the biggest win, if additional cloud support is built into the array."
"In the next release of this solution, we would like to see automated copy data management for SQL Server."
"There's always an opportunity for new feature functionality."
"It took us a year to get it to stabilize and to get the best out of Pure."
"I would like some performance analytics which go deeper than today. It should be specific to some hosts and applications. This would be good."
"We would like to see better troubleshooting aspects. It helps us if we can find out where the problem is. Right now, it's difficult. Sometimes it's difficult to pinpoint the issue. If they had more visibility and more troubleshooting feature built into the tool that would really help."
"I like what they're doing, but some of my customers complain that they do not have all the bells and whistles and knobs to fine-tune workloads that some of the competitors have. In my opinion, that's good. All customers don't have dedicated storage gurus, and they can get themselves into trouble if they fine-tune too many of those high-performance knobs, but they do get knocked down. Pure Storage takes a hit in the minds and opinions of some of the customers because they cannot customize things as much as compared to a legacy storage provider's appliance such as NetApp, Dell EMC, or even HPE. I personally think 95% of my customers are better off letting the system fine-tune itself. That was something that you needed to do 12 or 15 years ago, but now with all-flash, the technology can handle what it needs to handle. Customers just end up shooting themselves in the foot if they are tweaking too many default settings."
"It goes at about 95 percent, so we have had some performance issues. It is hard to clear them."
Earn 20 points
Fungible Storage Cluster is ranked 33rd in All-Flash Storage while Pure Storage FlashArray is ranked 3rd in All-Flash Storage with 174 reviews. Fungible Storage Cluster is rated 7.0, while Pure Storage FlashArray is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Fungible Storage Cluster writes "Easy to implement and configure but the security and reporting could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashArray writes "Effective provisioning, helpful support, and reliable". Fungible Storage Cluster is most compared with , whereas Pure Storage FlashArray is most compared with Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, HPE Nimble Storage, IBM FlashSystem and VMware vSAN.
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.