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."For us, the most valuable feature is the compression and deduplication. Being able to deploy a three to one ratio for storage is absolutely critical in today's world with the growing need for storage and the growing need for more space."
"The scalability is good."
"We also like the compactness, the small footprint. It takes up very little space in a data center and uses little power."
"Very stable; no worries about how much it can handle."
"Pure gives us better compression, it's easier to manage, a lot less hands-on."
"Pure Storage is extremely reliable — it's never failed."
"On a scale of one to ten, where ten is the most comfortable pricing, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"The amount of data that I have moved to it from legacy storage has enabled us to retire units that are three or four times the physical size."
"It has allowed us to set up a fully functioning disaster recovery site with replication, which we have been able to configure between our 3PAR systems."
"It runs. I don't have a problem with it. If it needs an update, I can do it in the middle of the day with nobody being the wiser. It is phenomenal in that respect. As a hospital, I get two hours every quarter to reboot things, so it is imperative that nothing goes down."
"The product has definitely improved throughput. We are able to more efficiently see patients because all of our medical records and practice management software seems to run faster. Uploading images and charts is a lot faster. Recalling information in the exam rooms is faster. The overall throughput of data, going back and forth, is so we can more efficiently see patients, and it also helps increase our patient flow. We can see patients a lot faster, getting them in and out a lot more quickly."
"We have our backups set up to replicate between two sites, then we also have our storage set up to replicate between two sites."
"This system has been (by far) the easiest to use, manage, and expand."
"Its stability is the most valuable. It has soft alerts. When an alert is raised, we get a call from HP saying that there is this type of alert, and they need to do a remote session to check things. Similarly, for firmware updates, they get in touch to say that a firmware upgrade is required on your storage. They schedule a time and take control remotely to upgrade the firmware. In all such cases, there is no downtime. Everything is done when a full-fledged operation is going on. Its user interface is also quite good. We are quite accustomed to this user interface. We can easily take a look at the current usage or the amount of storage. It is quite easily understandable, and I can present those things to my seniors or other people who are not that tech-savvy, and they can easily understand what we are trying to tell them. We can easily show them that we are using around 87% of the storage, so we need to plan for another tree and things like that."
"The product lasts a very long time without having to be replaced. It's had a very long life."
"The stability is what we consider to be the best feature it provides. The stability of this solution is what conquers us, every day."
"Saves space with deduplication"
"Better performance and lower costs."
"NAS stability"
"The input and output per second performance are satisfactory."
"The solution is stable."
"Data consolidation and visualization."
"Can use both SAN and NAS at the same time."
"It is good to have a unified storage where you can have block and file level protocols."
"I’d love to view the average, minimum and maximum performance in the reports (Analysis tab - Performance) but it is only graphics and you need to export data in CSV to find this information."
"Self-backup is the only feature lacking in this solution."
"We would like to see more development on their Copy Automation Tool (CAT) for Oracle, as well as better integration for our customers running Oracle VM."
"It is not possible to create a cluster on top of multiple arrays."
"Its price needs improvement. Its price is almost double than any other flash storage solution."
"I would rate this solution an eight. To make it a ten it would have to be a little cheaper."
"We would like to be able to connect to data tape for backup, specifically to the LTO backups."
"I would love to see a true one click upgrade solution. Right now, you have to click and schedule an appointment with Pure Storage to be able to upgrade. I would love for it to automatically download, install, and fall-over every controller as it updates."
"The product is quite expensive."
"I would like to see compatibility with NVMe."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ should increase the storage capacity."
"We had a minor error when we were configuring this system, which initially detracted from its overall stability."
"The engagement of the tool's vendor is costly."
"In the next release, I would like them to make it a little easier to find where everything is in the new console. It now has the OneView look and sometimes I don't think the OneView look is enough. It's too different from the original console that was a separate system."
"Setting up 3PAR is somewhat complicated, and it took about a week."
"This solution only provides active-passive replication, as opposed to active-active."
"As I see it, there could be more interfaces, more cache, etc."
"It lacks automatic tiering, When you use data, some of it goes cold. It is not hot data, so the system should automatically move that data to the SATA, while the hot data is kept on tier-one, the SaaS or SSD drives."
"Replication should ideally be part of the ONTAP base bundle."
"The solution could do more than just data."
"The high cost of the product is an area of concern, so from an improvement perspective, the tool needs to be made cheaper."
"The solution can improve on the replication features."
"The WAFL is slow."
"The user interface could be improved."
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 6th in NAS with 299 reviews while NetApp FAS Series is ranked 2nd in NAS with 97 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 and NetApp AFF, whereas NetApp FAS Series is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), NetApp AFF, HPE StorageWorks MSA, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and VAST Data. 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.