We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem and NetApp FAS Series 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."It has good, reliable, fast storage."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"Overall stability is very good. It is a very stable solution."
"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 standout features for us in Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its robust DDoS protection, seamless transparent failover, and failback capabilities ensuring high availability."
"The Pure1 component is most valuable at this point in time when comparing it with EMC. Pure1 is where you can have your diagnostics in the cloud, so you can look at things from your mobile phone."
"It's incredibly easy to use and greatly simplified our ability to both deploy and manage our storage subsystems."
"The initial setup is straightforward and can be done in an hour and a half by one person."
"Ability to manage third-party arrays and virtualise them: One screen to control multiple arrays. Simplified administration."
"IBM FlashSystem is a flexible solution with plenty of features."
"The maintenance service and support from IBM is very good."
"The feature I find most valuable, is the deduplication, because the nature of the data that we are using in our current environment, has a lot of replicated data."
"IBM FlashSystem is the best solution for storage virtualization."
"The most crucial feature of IBM FlashSystem is compression."
"The installation is nice and easy."
"Saves space with deduplication"
"I like the unified management feature because sometimes you end up running a single protocol on the entire system."
"It is very easy to expand disks and manage CIFS."
"The most valuable feature of the NetApp FAS Series is its stability."
"The most valuable feature is SnapMirror."
"The replication feature is noteworthy because it's faster than most and it uses little bandwidth. Then there's the friendly interface that the equipment offers. With this interface, it is very easy to manage."
"The solution is very stable and reliable"
"It allows our Windows and Unix teams to have a centralized point to share data between the two."
"There is room for improvement in catering to midrange storage needs, especially for customers seeking Enterprise-class features."
"In the future, I would like to see integration with enterprise backup systems."
"In the next release, I would like to see real-time analytics for further insight into consumption models."
"They could add more support for file storage and different types of storage."
"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."
"The UI for this solution needs to be improved."
"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."
"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."
"We had issues when attempting to do a flash, we hope to resolve it soon."
"The generic functionality of IBM FlashSystem, IBM always dismisses using file share or sharing protocols inside their storage hardware, and they only focus on the block-level storage."
"IBM should improve its data reduction development."
"I would like to see an improvement in the handling of large amounts of rights."
"The deduplication and compression ratio is not very good. It's not reaching a very high ratio."
"IBM FlashSystems is lagging in optimizing storage technologies."
"One area for improvement is in the GUI, where host clusters are not properly dealt with. With Hypervisor host clusters, all hosts must see the same volumes in the same order. Using the concept of a “host-group” has been around (even with IBM) for many years, so why not with the V7000?"
"The solution's pricing is a bit high so there is room for improvement."
"We're supposed to have used NetApp FAS Series for replication, but then one of the nodes failed, and then it's taken us some time to bring it up."
"Cost is always a factor. Some people choose EMC or Dell because they perceive NetApp as being more expensive."
"No other area for improvement comes to mind other than its price. Making the price more attractive will help this solution have a bigger market share."
"I would like to see less latency and higher IOPS."
"For long term partnership in Myanmar, the local warehouse should be built in Myanmar that's something I'd like to see. We have some issues with supply so there is sometimes a delay in getting the hardware."
"Needs more SAN support."
"They should add new features to the product."
"I think this kind of infrastructure is mostly obsolete. To keep up with developments in this space, you need to move all these features to an All-Flash solution."
IBM FlashSystem is ranked 4th in NAS with 106 reviews while NetApp FAS Series is ranked 2nd in NAS with 98 reviews. IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2, while NetApp FAS Series is rated 8.8. 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 NetApp FAS Series writes "Offers good performance and ". IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Dell Unity XT, NetApp AFF and HPE StorageWorks MSA, whereas NetApp FAS Series is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), NetApp AFF, HPE StorageWorks MSA, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and HPE StoreEasy. See our IBM FlashSystem vs. NetApp FAS Series report.
See our list of best NAS vendors, best Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) vendors, and best All-Flash Storage 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.