We performed a comparison between HPE StoreEasy and IBM FlashSystem based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NAS solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution's most valuable feature is the duplication."
"This solution allows me to better and more easily manage user data without impacting my primary storage."
"The most valuable feature of HPE StoreEasy is the storing of virtual machines."
"I can use both the on-premises and cloud storage options. I need to have an APR extension from StoreEasy, and it's that simple."
"I like the user quotas, integrations, and separations for storage."
"I like the tool's provisioning feature and OneView."
"The most crucial feature of IBM FlashSystem is compression."
"The installation is nice and easy."
"Installing FlashSystem is very easy. It takes less than half an hour, and I can handle it all myself."
"The power systems are very reliable if you are running 24/7 operations. For ongoing mission-critical applications, it's the best solution."
"High availability and enhanced security; Proven dependability; Data compression with hardware acceleration; Advanced copy services features are all in this product."
"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."
"The initial customer technical support was efficient and effective."
"It is simple to make an update."
"It would be better if it were more scalable. In the next release, I would like to access some Microsoft Windows storage server features. I guess the newest version of Windows Server has some restrictions."
"We need some monitoring tools and it would be helpful if they were included."
"The cluster service is not available in the latest version of HPE StoreEasy."
"The support of HPE StoreEasy can improve its responsiveness. Dell support is better."
"When I configure the StoreEasy in a complex environment I have problems finding compatibility with all the software."
"I would like to improve the tool's technical support. I would also like to see the product's hybrid cloud version."
"Our customers have raised concerns about the limitations of the FlashSystem 5200 and 7300, which only offer a 32-gigabyte connection."
"This product lacks some of the options we wanted. For example, expansion was difficult and it required a lot of patching to be done."
"This solution needs a management console where we are alerted to issues and can report them, or escalate them through email or another method."
"The solution's infrastructure technology level could be PCI Express 5 instead of PCI Express 4 for the next version."
"Our model does not support compression or deduplication."
"We use some open-source tools for monitoring, such as Grafana and it should be bundled along with IBM FlashSystem."
"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."
"It is slightly more expensive, however, it all depends on your supplier."
HPE StoreEasy is ranked 8th in NAS with 7 reviews while IBM FlashSystem is ranked 4th in NAS with 106 reviews. HPE StoreEasy is rated 8.2, while IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of HPE StoreEasy writes "Good backup solution for applications that is also scalable and stable ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". HPE StoreEasy is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), NetApp FAS Series, Qumulo, FreeNAS and HPE 3PAR StoreServ, whereas IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, Dell Unity XT and NetApp AFF. See our HPE StoreEasy vs. IBM FlashSystem report.
See our list of best NAS vendors.
We monitor all NAS 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.