We performed a comparison between Pure Storage FlashArray and Pure FlashArray X NVMe based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Pure FlashArray X NVMe came out ahead of Pure Storage FlashArray. Although the two products are easy to deploy, have quality support, and have a good ROI, Pure Storage FlashArray is more expensive.
"Offers excellent features like efficient data reduction, a reliable SafeMode, and a great support model for continuous assistance and updates."
"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."
"It has benefited my organization because it has reduced time to insights."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and performance."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use."
"The high availability of the product is the most valuable feature."
"The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes."
"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 most valuable feature of this solution is the support."
"The most valuable feature is that maintenance is free."
"The mobile app is very helpful."
"We were actually able to do multiple upgrades, including head upgrades and moving between the platforms, M20 and M50, over the years. We have never once lost a ping and have never had an outage due to an OS upgrade or a complete head upgrade."
"The scalability options are very nice because you can scale it much better and faster. The scalability was there in the previous environment also, but this is far better than what we had before. It basically helps the user in case they are looking for more storage. We can scale it much faster."
"The technical support is very good."
"It reduces space and the polar consumption. It also accelerates the application."
"It has improved my organization because now have lower latency, we get fewer complaints from customers, and we see a constant response time."
"We need better data deduplication."
"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."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"There is room for improvement in catering to midrange storage needs, especially for customers seeking Enterprise-class features."
"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."
"The UI for this solution needs to be improved."
"We would like to see more visibility into garbage collection and CPU performance in the GUI."
"We would like to see VNC integration or be able to use Pure Storage with VNC."
"Its price could be cheaper. It is not the cheapest one out there, but I'm not directly involved in the figures and negotiations."
"From a scalability perspective, it is a very small storage solution, so it's not very expandable."
"I would love to see a true one click upgrade solution. Right now, you have to click and schedule an appointment with Pure Storage to be able to upgrade. I would love for it to automatically download, install, and fall-over every controller as it updates."
"It's too early to tell if we've seen a reduction in total cost of ownership. The solution is expensive."
"There are many features which need to be added, particularly on the replication side."
"There was some complexity in the initial setup."
"We need to add more storage in Pure Storage FlashArray with the cluster mode activated for us to have better performance."
"One thing I'd like to see in a future release is integration between their main storage array and what they call their FlashBlade product; to be able to snapshot directly from the primary array into multiple different backup copies on FlashBlade."
Pure FlashArray X NVMe is ranked 15th in All-Flash Storage with 28 reviews while Pure Storage FlashArray is ranked 3rd in All-Flash Storage with 174 reviews. Pure FlashArray X NVMe is rated 9.2, while Pure Storage FlashArray is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Pure FlashArray X NVMe writes "Reasonably priced, scales well, and offers good stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashArray writes "Effective provisioning, helpful support, and reliable". Pure FlashArray X NVMe is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Dell PowerMax NVMe, whereas Pure Storage FlashArray is most compared with Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, HPE Nimble Storage, IBM FlashSystem and VMware vSAN. See our Pure FlashArray X 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.