We performed a comparison between HPE Nimble Storage and HPE 3RAP StoreServ based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, HPE Nimble Storage came out ahead of HPE 3RAP StoreServ. Even though both products are easy to deploy, have many valuable features, and are in the same price range, HPE 3RAP StoreServ requires improvements in its technical support availability which caused inconveniences for numerous customers.
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reliability."
"It has good, reliable, fast storage."
"The solution is scalable."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe will quickly overcome all the hurdles you face, including network and latency issues."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and performance."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use."
"We're using the all-flash arrays and, with the deduplication and compression, it just really fits our virtualization environment very well."
"Thanks to HPE remote IT assistance, they can do the updates with the configuration in best-case scenario."
"The most valuable feature for me is the solution's availability."
"This system has been (by far) the easiest to use, manage, and expand."
"This product is stable, aside from the performance problems we had."
"I benefit from the HPE Call Home feature. It tells me about any issue once I have it."
"It's a really stable solution. We have no problems with the customer, no negative feedback from them on this."
"I like the speed capabilities that it provides. The deduplication features definitely have some huge potential. The latest firmware, where they've enabled compression for workloads that aren't very good for deduplication, I can definitely see huge potential there."
"The deduplication and compression capabilities are powerful."
"Their remote management and understanding when things are starting to go wrong and their ability to fix them before the customer even knows, this has been a big positive when a customer makes the decision to go with Nimble"
"Definitely ease-of-use. I've experienced many different arrays out there and Nimble is definitely there."
"This product is very easy to set up."
"It is easy to use. Not too complicated."
"The solution's predictive analytics is good. It helps to save costs."
"It's very easy to set up. It's very stable, and it has got great deduplication, especially for hypervisor users."
"The most valuable feature is data mirroring."
"It's more multi-tenant functionality in their Pure1 manage portal that is lacking."
"We need better data deduplication."
"I'd like to see the product implement active replication for vehicles such as VMware."
"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 tool's portfolio is minimal. It is expensive."
"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."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"It is on the expensive side."
"Setting up 3PAR is somewhat complicated, and it took about a week."
"I would like to see more virtualization: storage virtualization, data virtualization would be very nice."
"The cloud-based monitoring Infosight would be better if users are automatically enrolled in the cloud/group based on the configuration or information gathered or uploaded on the internet."
"We did a firmware upgrade, and it brought the whole sandbox down. It was supposed to be done transparently, and that did not happen. It was not like we did it on our own; we had support set it up for us."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ has limited flexibility in building replication solutions. There are limitations to the number of IOPS the system can do. It's not bad as it is doing its job. However, for the application, if you need a toolbox, you can build everything concerning periodic replication modes of synchronous or asynchronous three-site, four-site, with supported cascading which requires you to buy an IBM product. It also takes a few hours to one day to upgrade the system and sometimes; it takes more time because, in some HPE 3PAR StoreServ 20000 Storage, you have an eight-node system. If you do an upgrade, you do it node by node and every node might take more than an hour."
"We have had some bad issues on stability."
"An area of improvement for this solution is an increase in the bandwidth as well as an upgrade of the storage functionality and capabilities. The storage needs to be expandable for future-proofing."
"The first array that they sent us was in some type of a factory mode. We didn't find that out until we loaded a bunch of data onto it, then we had to back it all off. We had to replace the array, which was sort of painful."
"I really would like to see synchronous replication. This is something that when we have multiple arrays in our environment and being able to do something like a zero RPO."
"Web GUI should be HTML5."
"Its pricing could be better. It's expensive."
"The solution requires a higher availability."
"There is no active-active controller, which means that we can only have one controller online at a time."
"The most difficult part about Nimble was the fact that it didn't have a standard length."
"We have had some stability issues with one array which has happened twice during subsequent software updates but is due to a bad Postgres database."
"I would like to have more administrative rights, for example, root-level administrative rights to the underlying OS of the storage array. We want more access to the kind of underlying infrastructure of the storage array rather than relying on support. However, most companies are looking to have more managed solutions which is the opposite direction of what I want."
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 9th in All-Flash Storage with 299 reviews while HPE Nimble Storage is ranked 5th in All-Flash Storage with 119 reviews. HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.6, while HPE Nimble Storage is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of HPE 3PAR StoreServ writes "The product's technical support is outstanding as I can reach someone right away". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE Nimble Storage writes "Beneficial management software, straightforward installation, and good support". HPE 3PAR StoreServ is most compared with HPE Primera, Dell Unity XT, NetApp AFF, Dell PowerStore and HPE StorageWorks MSA, whereas HPE Nimble Storage is most compared with Dell Unity XT, Pure Storage FlashArray, Dell PowerStore, HPE Primera and Lenovo ThinkSystem DE Series. See our HPE 3PAR StoreServ vs. HPE Nimble Storage 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.
