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."Redundancy and the fault tolerance of the platform are the most impressive."
"All our junior partners can administer the storage arrays. It is simple and easy to use. We don't have to dedicate a whole team of full time people to work on it."
"The speed is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"This is the best all-flash storage array on the market."
"Performance, dedupe, and that it works well with database workloads are its most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is its upgradeability."
"The scalability is good."
"The solution has probably reduced my power use substantially."
"It has helped a lot for times when our customers do DR testing. Instead of having to spin down and spin up, I can do it live and seamless. I do not have to schedule downtime with an organization."
"The solution has increased our performance by about 40 percent."
"Thanks to HPE remote IT assistance, they can do the updates with the configuration in best-case scenario."
"3PAR is easy to keep running and does not require too much effort. It has been very reliable, which is key."
"If there is a problem then the HPE facility will detect it and immediately contact me."
"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."
"It has improved uptime, as well as speed to delivery."
"If it runs, and you don't know about it, that is the best thing that you can have in IT infrastructure. This is what 3PAR does for us."
"Most valuable features are its ease of use, robust Snapshot functionality, and that you can use it in two datacenters with SnapMirror-ing."
"Better performance and lower costs."
"Ability to use mirroring and SnapVault have made backup no longer necessary."
"The solution is stable."
"It is very flexible. It integrates well with the public cloud and other components, so everything can be API driven. Therefore, it is very easy to automate it."
"The product is flexible."
"Data consolidation and visualization."
"Flexible and reliable storage solution with multiple features such as cloning, replication, and deduplication. Data migration can be done without any performance implications on the production systems."
"I would like to see more cloud integration."
"It is way in excess of what we need. If anything, we could see a bit more speed. I'm just comparing it with what some of my colleagues who are implementing their own systems do."
"I would like to see more detailed reporting on the data. However, it would be nice to know what are the exact VMs usage after deduplication and/or what that VMs actual latency and bandwidth is, outside of VMware."
"With scalability, I have run into a little problem with our last upgrade. There were some undocumented limitations to the number of drives that our controller could run on. So, instead of putting in a new data pack as we had anticipated, we had to keep adding and removing to get up to the capacity that we needed to be. What should have been a one day process (or a few hours) turned into a month and a half process."
"Having something native in the Pure Storage ecosystem would make it integrated and in one single company, and we wouldn't have to work with multiple organizations."
"In the next release I would like to see integration into other third-party player providers like Google."
"We would like more extended historical data to help with some of the capacity planning. This is something that we are asking for all the time. E.g., what was the historical performance of this particular volume? So, we would like more historicals."
"I would like a feature to integrate with external or cloud solutions. For example, if I want to use this storage for a backup from the cloud, I want to have integration with the cloud vendors, such as Microsoft, Oracles, or Amazon. It could be available as an API to allow seamless integration. Additionally, the solution could improve by having native integration with a cloud provider, such as VMware or Microsoft, this would reduce the need to use third-party solutions to complete the task."
"We would like to see the ability to not only be integrated with hybrid IT, but on-prem."
"3PAR did not increase our performance, and it has increased our latency by at least double."
"The main problem for 3PAR right now is cost."
"I would like them to improve it so I can do firmware upgrades without downtime."
"This solution should be easier to use."
"Would like to see some management functions through a web interface."
"The speed of the hard disk could be better. The performance is the main issue for us. The performance of the VMs is not comparable to desktop machines, for instance, and we might need another solution to improve the performance. Other than that, we don't have any issues. We already have a great part of storage with SSDs, and the performance is not as good as I expected."
"The performance of the solution is not good anymore and the software is different from all the other types and is not compatible. There are more negative things at this moment than positive. This is why we are removing them all from our organization this year."
"The high cost of the product is an area of concern, so from an improvement perspective, the tool needs to be made cheaper."
"It could be more flexible in terms of configuration."
"NetApp systems are somewhat more complex, though not excessively so. If you're transitioning from a Windows server environment to NetApp, get training or education; otherwise, you might struggle with this solution."
"The WAFL is slow."
"The biggest issue we face is parts delivery. There's no local warehouse in Myanmar, so if a customer encounters a technical problem like an IMEI issue, they have to wait a long time for replacement parts."
"We have some experience with older equipment end-of-life. For example, when warranty support stops or updates stop – it can be frustrating. Not all clients can buy a new filer every year or two, and NetApp ending support a bit quickly can be a concern."
"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 would like to have further integration with some backup products. They have some of them already, but there could be more."
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 StoreOnce, 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.