We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem and Pure Storage FlashBlade 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."Pure FlashArray X NVMe has low latency and high Ops. It is an evergreen model."
"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."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use."
"The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reliability."
"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."
"The initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward."
"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 performance of the All-Flash System is very good. There is more enhanced performance and data production in the solution, which I appreciate."
"Ability to manage third-party arrays and virtualise them: One screen to control multiple arrays. Simplified administration."
"It's very easy to manage."
"The installation is nice and easy."
"The performance is very good and we use this product to enhance our core system."
"When it comes to the interface of the solution we did not encounter any challenges. Additionally, the solution has good documentation."
"Over the years, it has become increasingly user-friendly."
"IBM FlashSystem is a powerful effective storage solution. Additionally, it is user-friendly, anyone can use it."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the rewrite speed and the nonstop services."
"Pure Storage FlashBlade is user-friendly. It's replication feature is great because it has active replication and active DR. That's the beauty of the product. It's a perfect solution for block storage."
"We have seen a reduction in the total cost of ownership by around 20%."
"The most valuable features include the ease of implementation, ease of use and the speed that you can do backup and recovery on."
"It helps simplify our storage, because the user interface is very simple and the installation is easy."
"The product is scalable and easy to expand."
"I would rate this solution an eight plus. It has has good flexibility and stability, it's easy to manage and the response time is good."
"The snapshots, replication, and the ability to have immutable blades are the most valuable features. You're putting data snapshots out in those blades, and they cannot be touched. Its performance is great."
"Our use cases require more multi-tenant capabilities and additional VLAN interfaces for separating different customers. We currently use it to provide storage, sometimes shared storage, to different customers, but it is less flexible in comparison to a dedicated solution."
"In the future, I would like to see integration with enterprise backup systems."
"I want to see Pure Storage not only be for fast storage, but I want to see it be for the entire data center."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing of the product."
"We've seen that when we create a POD in synchronous mode, it increases the latency."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"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."
"Events/log analysis tools."
"Cloud file sharing is an area that needs improvement."
"I would like to see bigger modules."
"IBM FlashSystems is lagging in optimizing storage technologies."
"The solution is not easy to use and could improve."
"Sometimes the performance is effective but it gets resolved in the process."
"The deduplication and compression ratio is not very good. It's not reaching a very high ratio."
"The solution should improve its pricing and the mechanism in the reduction pool."
"I would also like to see better support for CIFS workloads."
"Compared to, for example, Hitachi NAS, the solution is not mature at all. It's just in its infancy as far as technology goes."
"The features provided for SMB customers are limited."
"There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."
"I want efficiency. FlashBlade doesn't have efficiency now."
"I have not seen ROI."
"The Pure Storage Orchestrator is our biggest pain point at the moment. If we can have more say in future developments of feature sets that we will need to support for our use case, that would be pretty beneficial to us."
"There could be improvements in public cloud integration."
IBM FlashSystem is ranked 6th in All-Flash Storage with 106 reviews while Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 16th in All-Flash Storage with 31 reviews. IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2, while Pure Storage FlashBlade 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 Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "A high-performing and scalable solution that improves data performance for S3 workloads". IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, Dell Unity XT and NetApp AFF, whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, MinIO, Pure Storage FlashArray and Red Hat Ceph Storage. See our IBM FlashSystem vs. Pure Storage FlashBlade 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.
