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."The most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray are simplicity, ease of use, and dashboard management."
"The most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray is its high stability level."
"This solution is very scalable."
"Having fast storage allows actual servers to perform in high capacity so we don't have slowdowns on our applications."
"The sales and executive support have been outstanding compared to the rest of the market... My upgrade paths have been simple on the Pure... It's a lot simpler to implement and a lot simpler to manage."
"The initial setup was very straightforward and very quick. It was up and running in our data center within 24 hours of receiving it."
"Technical support has been amazing."
"The most valuable feature is it never goes down. We can expand and create volumes."
"The solutions has increased our performance. We went from 24,000 IOPS to around 70,000 IOPS."
"The solution is easy to use and very stable."
"Any action we want to do with a Dell EMC product needs a license. But with 3PAR's converged solution, at least there is no need to purchase more licenses to get the all the features that we need. We can get basic and mid-range features without licenses."
"It has a really powerful tool to measure data, how it is working, the performance, and if we have any bottlenecks."
"You can scale it out almost indefinitely."
"We use for our tier one and two apps, so they can do failover, synchronous replication."
"Valuable features include the intuitiveness of the SAN itself, a lot of the built-in logic and functionality, the tiering that it uses to determine what type of disk is best for the various types of workloads, and the automation that is built in. It's also easy to manage."
"We have additional space in the enclosures for additional disks, so we can scale up without any downtime."
"The product is user-friendly and helps to evaluate the performance of each node. It ensures that if one node encounters an issue, the system can immediately redistribute the workload without interruptions. This setup provides uninterrupted operation for our systems."
"The initial setup was so straightforward. It was well-documented."
"It allows our Windows and Unix teams to have a centralized point to share data between the two."
"The SnapMirror is a good tool because, as long as you're going NetApp to NetApp, it's ultimately the fastest way to move data. We replicate everything to another site for disaster recovery."
"Saves space with deduplication"
"NetApp FAS is highly stable and reliable, especially under a heavy load. That is what I like most about the NetApp."
"The replication feature is noteworthy because it's faster than most and it uses little bandwidth. Then there's the friendly interface that the equipment offers. With this interface, it is very easy to manage."
"The most valuable feature for us is the combining of HA and SnapMirror."
"I would like to see support for NVMe, end-to-end."
"I would like to see the NAS add-on component become more fault-tolerant than just a single virtual machine running inside the array. I'm unwilling to use it for that reason."
"When we were doing some tests, we found that there was an I/O freeze when they were switching the controller."
"The technical support is okay, but could be improved."
"What it needs to do is work a little closer with solutions, like VMware, so it understands the particular workloads that are on it. Today, it does not understand the applications which are running against it."
"The number of Filesystems is limited, which it is not on the EMC VNX."
"The connectivity needs improvement. You do not have the possibility to have a file and block connectivity at the same time on the same machine. It has limited ability to do so."
"As partners, we should have the option to download the software, rather than have to go back through Pure to obtain it."
"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."
"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."
"I would like to have more details on alerting. It is not real granular right now. What It gives you is sort of basic, and we can't do a lot of tweaking on our own. We would like to be able to tweak some of the alerts for our team."
"The setup was complex from the perspective of the employees having to go through five days of training. If they simplified the administrative process of maintaining the unit, that would go a long way."
"It needs better dedupe. It is hard for all the older generation arrays to put up dedupe because they tend to do the other stuff so much better. They have to keep the stability before any other new feature."
"The GUI was a little hard to figure out how to use."
"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 management interface is not intuitive."
"Interfacing with the cloud environment could be better. I want to be able to move some cloud volume and integrate it seamlessly with my home on-premise storage. Sometimes I have issues with port permissions. NetApp probably needs to improve more on the integration side from on-premise to the cloud."
"No other area for improvement comes to mind other than its price. Making the price more attractive will help this solution have a bigger market share."
"There are some technical limitations, but it would be great to have in-line deduplication and in-line compression for the FAS series as well."
"Its licensing cost can be improved."
"Cost is always a factor. Some people choose EMC or Dell because they perceive NetApp as being more expensive."
"Technical support needs to be improved, as there are no longer partners in our country."
"There is room for improvement in deployment and configuration processes."
"The product should improve its user experience."
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, 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.