We performed a comparison between Dell PowerStore and NetApp NVMe AFF A800 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We're able to get higher-density workloads on the same infrastructure, and we have a smaller physical footprint. The performance is excellent – during our test the bottlenecks are never on the X array, it just keeps picking up the pace to match what you need. The real-time visibility is a differentiator in my opinion."
"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."
"Offers excellent features like efficient data reduction, a reliable SafeMode, and a great support model for continuous assistance and updates."
"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."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe will quickly overcome all the hurdles you face, including network and latency issues."
"The solution is very straightforward to set up."
"FlashArray has some fresh efficiency features. I've never seen a storage solution with a compression rating this high before. It's at least 4-to-1 on Oracle databases. It's the best flash storage for Oracle."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reliability."
"The way you're able to manage all your PowerStores as one solution is very good for us. PowerStore enables you to federate or cluster multiple appliances with automated load balancing. In terms of management, it's helpful that we can do it from a single interface where we're able to manage multiple PowerStores. When you have multiple PowerStores it works intelligently by running the workloads based on the needs of the infrastructure."
"Dell EMC PowerStore is scalable."
"Pricing is very good. It's very competitive against those of all the others that I looked at in the marketplace, such as Hitachi, IBM, HP, and Pure. Dell is right there in the mix as far as providing the best price point as well as meeting the performance requirements that we have."
"It's a great product. Integrating PowerStore with the IT workflow is easy."
"The supportability of SCME drives for faster data access from the PowerStore and is the most valuable feature."
"PowerStore is easy to use. All the drives use soft encryption. To upgrade it, you download the app, and it runs by itself. It's very easy to deploy, share, and create volumes."
"The simplicity and ease of use have been very valuable features. I have a very small team, and only half of the team is well versed in the HP product. Whereas if I bring PowerStore in, everyone can learn it because it will be new on the floor."
"The solution is easy to use and has good performance."
"We find the product to be very flexible."
"The storage features are valuable."
"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."
"The product can be scaled vertically as well as horizontally."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a product that is fast and provides a fast I/O."
"The most valuable features are stability and performance."
"During the use cases of the solution, its reliability and suitability are the best."
"You can easily scale up, and scale-out."
"It is on the expensive side."
"We've seen that when we create a POD in synchronous mode, it increases the latency."
"The software layer has to improve."
"In the next release, I would like to see real-time analytics for further insight into consumption models."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"The UI for this solution needs to be improved."
"You cannot tag a LUN with a description, and that should be improved. What I like on the Unity side is that when I expand LUNs or do things, there is an information field on the LUN. This is the Information field that you can tag on your LUNs to let yourself know, "Hey, I've added this much space on this date". Pure lacks that ability. So, you don't have a mechanism that's friendly for tracking your data expansions on the LUN and for adding any additional information. That's a downside for me."
"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."
"There is no Synchronize replication feature on the storage."
"Data reduction needs improvement."
"I do not like having to use VPLEX for synchronous replication, as opposed to having the store software built-in."
"The support is not very good."
"The cost of technical support is high."
"You cannot delegate permissions."
"The setup process could be improved. We had some issues regarding configuration and the time it took to do things. It wasn't specifically the people we worked with, but more the process and how it's done. They can work on that."
"The storage could be improved. I would like a feature for how to best secure an appliance and the storage since we are connecting the container to the public cloud. I would like them to develop another level of security, making it more secure than from what they have now."
"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."
"The product’s UI could be better."
"The support can take a few days to have a response. However, the response that we do receive is very informative."
"Stability is an area with a certain shortcoming where the solution needs to improve"
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"Increasing the RAM, and including physical cords would be beneficial."
Dell PowerStore is ranked 1st in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays with 47 reviews while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is ranked 7th in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays with 10 reviews. Dell PowerStore is rated 8.6, while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Dell PowerStore writes "It has a very strong NAS that can support a lot of big, heavy environments". 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 ". Dell PowerStore is most compared with Dell Unity XT, IBM FlashSystem, NetApp AFF, Pure Storage FlashArray and Dell PowerMax NVMe, whereas NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is most compared with Huawei OceanStor Dorado, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, NetApp ASA, Dell PowerMax NVMe and IBM FlashSystem. See our Dell PowerStore vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 report.
See our list of best NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays vendors and best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays 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.
