We performed a comparison between HPE 3PAR StoreServ 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 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."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe has low latency and high Ops. It is an evergreen model."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"It's helped us because we've changed fundamentally what we talk about. We don't talk about storage and different tiers of storage anymore nor do we talk about servers. We talk now about applications and how applications impact the business and end users."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reliability."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and performance."
"The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes."
"It has benefited my organization because it has reduced time to insights."
"We have much better performance than we managed earlier and are now saving lots of space."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ is easy to use and has good performance."
"There's a lot of good features. HPE 3PAR StoreServ is similar to Dell EMC. It is a high-speed system with automatic failover/failback, integrated with Microsoft Hyper-V and VMware. These are the main reason for choosing HPE 3PAR StoreServ in Denmark. We have a very good consulting service together with the product."
"With the HPE GreenLake Flex Capacity, we can grow as required."
"Whatever failures you have, there is no single point of failure. So, any failure, you get an alert, you have time, you plan the fix, the replacement, and so on. So your operations are intact."
"The solution is stable."
"The 3PAR tool is cheaper to maintain with more storage available."
"The performance has been fantastic. It has not had many issues whatsoever, and what issues they do have, the support picks up on it quickly. They send us tickets saying that they are doing work without us even having to engage them."
"The most valuable features are the NAS features and NetApp's excellent support."
"NetApp FAS is highly stable and reliable, especially under a heavy load. That is what I like most about the NetApp."
"Most valuable features are its ease of use, robust Snapshot functionality, and that you can use it in two datacenters with SnapMirror-ing."
"Has rock solid reliability and is easy to use."
"It has a very good implementation of the Active Directory services, so implementation into a Windows network is easy."
"The solution is very stable and reliable"
"End-users like that they can rely on the Snapshot technology so they can do their restores themselves."
"Data consolidation and visualization."
"I want to see Pure Storage not only be for fast storage, but I want to see it be for the entire data center."
"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."
"Efficiency improvements would always be welcome, but I'm not sure if they could get more efficient."
"They could add more support for file storage and different types of storage."
"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 need better data deduplication."
"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."
"We've seen that when we create a POD in synchronous mode, it increases the latency."
"The main problem for 3PAR right now is cost."
"The solution could improve by being more secure."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ could have better integration into the cloud and converged infrastructure."
"I would like to see more flexibility with the cloud. I've actually just been in a presentation about it, here at HPE Discover 2018, so those features are coming."
"We are waiting for compression."
"The interface could be improved to match the system."
"With 3PAR, there is remote copy software which isn't very good."
"It's still an older architecture, you've got a lot of physical spinning disks. I would imagine more the memory-based computing is coming."
"The product must support more drives."
"Its operating system is very cumbersome. However, after you set it up, it runs pretty smoothly. Its file system is not very dynamic. It is very static."
"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."
"The solution can improve on the replication features."
"Needs to improve the adaptive storage quality of service."
"The product should improve its user experience."
"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."
"The high cost of the product is an area of concern, so from an improvement perspective, the tool needs to be made cheaper."
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 6th in NAS with 299 reviews while NetApp FAS Series is ranked 2nd in NAS with 98 reviews. HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.6, while NetApp FAS Series is rated 8.8. 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 NetApp FAS Series writes "Offers good performance and ". HPE 3PAR StoreServ is most compared with HPE Primera, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, 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 IBM FlashSystem. See our HPE 3PAR StoreServ 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.