We performed a comparison between Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and HPE 3PAR StoreServ 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."What I really like about this program, is that it is easy to use and easy to configurate."
"The high availability of the product is the most valuable feature."
"Offers excellent features like efficient data reduction, a reliable SafeMode, and a great support model for continuous assistance and updates."
"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."
"Pure has signature security technology, which cannot be deleted, even if you are an administrator."
"It has good, reliable, fast storage."
"It's incredibly easy to use and greatly simplified our ability to both deploy and manage our storage subsystems."
"The standout features for us in Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its robust DDoS protection, seamless transparent failover, and failback capabilities ensuring high availability."
"Data optimization, compression, and deduplication are the most important features for us."
"The most valuable features are external storage virtualization and the 100 percent data guaranteed availability."
"Hitachi's technical support is perfect."
"The efficiency ratio is just as high as advertised. It's very high relative to other storage solutions as well. The compression and deduplication capabilities are also very high."
"This is a good product with high capabilities and high reliability."
"One of the features, for us, that is important is the monitoring platform integrated into the solution. It has all the elements that we need to see, at all times, to be sure the platform is working right."
"The most valuable feature of Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform G Series is the platform and overall usage has been good. We have not had very many issues."
"The hybrid array provides scaleable, predictable, high performance with no capacity constraints."
"We have been able to scale faster and get our applications out in much less time. We don't need to worry about the platform's ability to manage the workload, so we are pretty happy."
"The most valuable features are their tight integration with VMware, their multi-node architecture, and their copy services, such as Peer Persistence."
"We have our backups set up to replicate between two sites, then we also have our storage set up to replicate between two sites."
"We went to an Active-Active data center, set it up to where both data centers are separate, but they act as one. We can have workloads at either side at any given time, and it is all based on the Peer Persistence architecture."
"We saved a ton of power just turning off our old one when we went to the new one."
"The all-flash positions our organization for growth. If somebody comes to us who needs an application with performance, we have that already formulated."
"It is a rugged, performance system; it is trouble-free and a workhorse."
"I think the storage is very good, the way it stores, the thin provisioning it provides, and the data protection. And it's easy to deploy in any environment. We are using VMware. So for me, it's a right click and it's deployed. We can configure and create LUNS very easily with 3PAR management, and the interface is very user-friendly. Easily understandable."
"We need better data deduplication."
"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."
"We have run into a couple of instances recently where we are running out of space. So we have had to buy some more packs for it and they have deployed fine and it has increased smoothly."
"I want to see Pure Storage not only be for fast storage, but I want to see it be for the entire data center."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"It is on the expensive side."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"In the future, I would like to see integration with enterprise backup systems."
"Its usability can be improved. It can have more management features. Its management tools lack features."
"The embedded management for installation feature has neither simplified nor complicated the management process, therefore, there is room for improvement."
"The installation procedure it a bit difficult, because it is a high-end solution. With this type of product, the original company is interested in doing the setup for customers in the area, but because of sanctions we were not able to get support in our area. We faced many issued trying to learn to run this product."
"This product should be easier to install and set up."
"The controllers in the product do not provide options for scalability."
"The user experience is pretty bad in Hitachi. A lot of mandatory tasks take a long time to work through."
"The pricing is high, but the product is good. Additional features like data duplication might make it even better."
"n future releases, I would like to see enhancements in the web GUI capabilities for direct management without additional PCM."
"We are using a built-in solution in 3PAR. We are using All-Flash Storage, and there are some difficulties with it. HPE has now developed a new tool system to support All-Flash, and that's why we are changing our investment. They must increase its performance. I want unlimited support, which is very important for performance. I am not interested in spinning disks. HPE is developing new storage systems called Primera, but they must be developed more."
"Anything new can be complex. There were some things in the initial deployment that I was not happy about. One of my directives was, "However, it's configured, ensure that it can never be overprovisioned." That one key thing was overlooked. This is why I had to have a support call last year, because it actually became overprovisioned and I had to move some stuff around."
"The solution’s customer support could be improved."
"While the stability is pretty good, it could always be improved upon."
"if it were easier for us to manage the product ourselves without having to get HPE to connect, because it sometimes it does take a bit to get the scheduling worked out with the HPE support. If it were simpler, then it might be easier for us to handle it ourselves."
"We have had a few issues with it. We had our virtual environment lock up a few times on storage-based things. We think we have it sorted out, but maybe it came down to a configuration issue on it."
"The solution must be vertically and horizontally expandable."
"HPE gives you how to get everything going, but it would be nice if they could go a little deeper sometimes. That is always the case: To get the value-add, you have to pay for those services."
More Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is ranked 10th in All-Flash Storage with 49 reviews while HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 9th in All-Flash Storage with 299 reviews. Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is rated 8.4, while HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform writes "Leverages a 3DC architecture with VSP for disaster recovery, offering a 100% data availability guarantee". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE 3PAR StoreServ writes "The product's technical support is outstanding as I can reach someone right away". Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is most compared with IBM FlashSystem, Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, Dell Unity XT and Dell PowerMax NVMe, whereas HPE 3PAR StoreServ is most compared with HPE Primera, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, NetApp AFF and IBM FlashSystem. See our HPE 3PAR StoreServ vs. Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform report.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors, best NAS vendors, and best Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) 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.
3PAR is SAS-based storage. The industry is already moving away from the 35-year-old SCSI-way, so it's not a good idea to buy any product with it.
I'm not sure about Hitachi, but as far as I know, they also have SAS backend, so, the obvious answer to the question "Which should I choose?" is "none of them".
My recommendation is - choose other vendors (or models) which provide end-to-end NVMe support and make a choice between them.
Hitachi, if cost and performance for mission-critical apps are high priority.
Otherwise, HPW 3PAR (or now HPE Primera) will be the best all-around for cost and performance. Plus, HPE's Storage Insight is the best on the market
It depends on what kind of requirement you will use with this All-Flash Storage Array.
Usually, high random IOPS is a must for AFA, however, recently there are more and more requirements that are talking about low latency as the key in the virtualization environment. So if you would like just for high random IOPS and MBPs, considering the SAS SSD AFA will be enough, but if lower latency will be your major impact in the environment, NVMe AFA will be the best.
https://blog.qsan.com/why-does...
NImble Storage from HPE or Primera, Hitachi sold their disk division. HPE 3Par will be announced soon as the end of life.
Instead, Primera has been created (Primera has the best from Nimble and 3Par). I hope it helps.
I think that you need to meet the needs looking to the best fit to your environment. Looking into Hitachi Vantara portfolio, you will see entry level storage to enterprise. At my point of view, performance, reliability and scalability should be considered.
Another consideration above performance (IOPS and latency), you must to provide the correct profile, such as block size, random or sequencial data, cache hit, replication and snapshots needs. All those informations provides a better solution for your environment.
Dont you forget about the scalability, I think that you must to know how you are growing to fit the best equipment.
Take a Dorado 3000 V6 form Huawei. Huawei OceanStor Dorado V6 all-flash storage sets new benchmarks in storage performance and reliability. The OceanStor Dorado delivers best-in-class performance of up to 20,000,000 IOPS. With the AI chips they are the first in the industry to deliver storage systems that get more intelligent
during the application operations.
Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series.
Hi,
Just assess Pure Storage box as well and also if you are focusing on some specific workload do mention it while discussing with the Pure Storage team like OLTP, DB(SQL/Oracle) or any platform service, etc. At last, your budget is also a major factor while evaluating. As all Flash Arrays do cost more.