We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem and IBM XIV based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of the solution is SCM (Storage Class Memory), which has the lowest latency value in the storage industry."
"The speed of the unit is its best feature. It performs very well."
"FlashSystem offers proven technology in a compact package."
"The solution is very easy to configure and use."
"The power systems are very reliable if you are running 24/7 operations. For ongoing mission-critical applications, it's the best solution."
"Stability-wise, this solution is fine."
"The most valuable features were the performance of the array, i.e., very low latency and high IOPS. Plus, the management interface is very easy to use."
"Over the years, it has become increasingly user-friendly."
"Very easy to produce reporting data (Snaps). Very easy and fast for provisioning devices and Remote mirroring."
"The performance and robustness of the systems are very good."
"Hands down, this is the easiest storage platform on the market to manage."
"As it spreads, a chuck of 1MB across the board means using all available spindles on the backend."
"IBM XIV's most valuable features are NVME, especially when it comes to de-duplication, compression, and responsiveness."
"Installation is amazingly easy."
"The data reduction pool feature sucks and is not recommended for use with heavy workloads."
"It has room for improvement in the area of stability."
"Enterprise data storage needs improvement. They should create a feature for data and file storage."
"IBM could do more marketing and improve brand awareness. I had never heard of this product until a colleague told me about it. FlashSystem could add a few features, but it would probably increase the price. For example, Pure Storage offers instant snapshotting and partitioning. That would be nice to have, but I think the cost would go up."
"The only issue my team faced was transferring the data from the old system to IBM FlashSystem, which is an area for improvement in the solution."
"Cloud file sharing is an area that needs improvement."
"They can improve its initial configuration. The initial configuration is currently very difficult. There are multiple choices or alternative ways to configure based on the use case and what you are targeting out of the device, that is, more capacity or more performance. These multiple alternatives cause a lot of confusion. They should increase the processing part of the nodes. Currently, you can cluster up to eight nodes. From my experience and the workload that I am facing in my environment currently, I would like to see either a bigger or stronger node or a larger number of nodes that can be clustered together. We formally communicated to them that we need to see either this or that, and they are working on something."
"Sometimes the performance is effective but it gets resolved in the process."
"This product was not a good fit for our organization as we have a ton of latency sensitive applications and XIV was not able to keep up with IO + latency demand."
"Until the drive is replaced, the pool_resizing is locked."
"I would rather have a web GUI served directly from the unit, and a CLI accessible directly through SSH."
"The change form synchronous mirroring to asynchronous (and vice versa) without reconfiguration from scratch would be helpful."
"I encountered stability (performance) issues during enclosure or disk rebuild. Also some power supply issues due to malfunctions of circuits. Sometimes "internal" Snap sessions hang and consume pool capacity."
"IBM XIV's scalability is adequate for our requirements, but because it's modular, you can't scale to larger requirements."
IBM FlashSystem is ranked 2nd in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 106 reviews while IBM XIV is ranked 10th in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 6 reviews. IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2, while IBM XIV is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM XIV writes "Using it behind the SAN volume controller, latency is predictable and it is reliable". IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, Dell Unity XT and NetApp AFF, whereas IBM XIV is most compared with . See our IBM FlashSystem vs. IBM XIV report.
See our list of best Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) vendors.
We monitor all Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) 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.
