We performed a comparison between HPE Nimble Storage and NetApp NVMe AFF A800 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two All-Flash Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of this solution is reliability."
"Overall stability is very good. It is a very stable solution."
"The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes."
"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."
"Pure has signature security technology, which cannot be deleted, even if you are an administrator."
"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 high availability of the product is the most valuable feature."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe will quickly overcome all the hurdles you face, including network and latency issues."
"They have really thought through their solution. They've covered everything."
"InfoSight is a valuable feature."
"InfoSight - analytics sight that collects data for all Nimble arrays deployed"
"HPE Nimble Storage uses the InfoSight platform and it is useful because we can identify the faults and can analyze the performance. It has many other features. This feature is the best that I have observed from HPE Nimble Storage."
"The stability is awesome. The product has always been reliable. It has been 100 percent up. We have never had any downtime with it. Even if a controller fails due to our firmware or whatever, it rolls over to the second one and keeps us running."
"The capacity for data storage and compression is good."
"Good architecture and produces a lot of IOPS."
"Some of the beneficial features I have found are the Block-level backups, the interface is easy to use, backups work well and the portal is functional."
"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."
"We find the product to be very flexible."
"You can easily scale up, and scale-out."
"Over the eight years, we've been using NetApp with ONTAP, we've never lost a bit of data, and we've only experienced a few minutes of downtime in that entire time."
"During the use cases of the solution, its reliability and suitability are the best."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a product that is fast and provides a fast I/O."
"Low latency is the most valuable feature."
"The product can be scaled vertically as well as horizontally."
"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."
"The tool's portfolio is minimal. It is expensive."
"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."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"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."
"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."
"We've seen that when we create a POD in synchronous mode, it increases the latency."
"Scalability, in terms of being able to scale out, is not easy and should be improved."
"The quality of technical support depends on which member of the support team you speak with."
"There is no active-active controller, which means that we can only have one controller online at a time."
"HPE does not have suffficient storage."
"I think the scalability of HPE Nimble Storage could be improved."
"The scalability could be better."
"The solution could improve by having more granularity. For example, having the ability to go deeper into specific IO channels or specific latency issues that can happen would be a benefit. HPE has this ability on their side but it would be useful to have it on our side."
"I want to see the full integration with OneView. I know they have started it, but I haven't had a chance to look at and evaluate it."
"The support can take a few days to have a response. However, the response that we do receive is very informative."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"The cost of the solution is quite high. It would be ideal if they could adjust it so that it's a but less."
"The initial setup should be easier, and more like a plug-and-play approach."
"Increasing the RAM, and including physical cords would be beneficial."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The product's performance has some shortcomings, making it an area that could be a little 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."
HPE Nimble Storage is ranked 5th in All-Flash Storage with 119 reviews while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is ranked 16th in All-Flash Storage with 10 reviews. HPE Nimble Storage is rated 9.0, while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of HPE Nimble Storage writes "Beneficial management software, straightforward installation, and good support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp NVMe AFF A800 writes "Very easy to manage, highly stable and offers robustness of the CLI, API, and GUI ". HPE Nimble Storage is most compared with Dell Unity XT, Pure Storage FlashArray, Dell PowerStore, HPE Primera and VMware vSAN, whereas NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Huawei OceanStor Dorado, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, NetApp ASA and Dell PowerMax NVMe. See our HPE Nimble Storage vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 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.