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."They have really good baked in analytics to show you trends for growth history, so it does help with future planning for data growth."
"It simplifies the overall management. We don't have to worry about storage anymore."
"Pure Storage is extremely reliable — it's never failed."
"The security operating system is its most valuable feature because it's very simple, easy to use, and operate. You don't have to do very serious training to operate this equipment. It's user-friendly and pretty straightforward."
"The performance of the storage is just unbelievable."
"It is noticeably easier to manage than other appliances that we have."
"Technical support is excellent. I've had very good responses from technical support. We had a couple of cases where we needed support. Some of the communications were purely over email and some has been an actual call to the service desk."
"The ease of use. That's what our customers love. They say it's very easy, they don't need special training, they don't need to call us or any other company or integrator to help them do their job. That's the main reason they purchase Pure."
"OneView is a nice interface."
"Resilience and reliability, unmatched. They take good care of us."
"Very recently, we are able to do a lot of data center automation by being able to script some of the 3PAR actions for our private cloud."
"After being properly configured, it has been a very stable product."
"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."
"The Remote Copy Group is amazing for the replication stuff."
"I like that it's stable. This is the reason why we're using these products. We work in the broadcast market, and stability is very important. HPE has global services, and that's also important. Dell and HPE are some big companies, and their solutions are robust and stable."
"The compression features are good."
"The most valuable feature for us is the combining of HA and SnapMirror."
"Snapshot, deduplication, and compression features are valuable."
"For us, the greatest aspect of the solution is the fact that it just runs. It is amazingly resilient. That's very important to us, because we are basically, with some exceptions, have a 24/7 operation."
"Compression of the backup Oracle by RMAN on NFS saves space 5:1."
"The solution is stable."
"The input and output per second performance are satisfactory."
"Adaptive balancing is a valuable feature."
"The storage efficiency provided a maximum savings in our storage utilization."
"From a scalability perspective, it is a very small storage solution, so it's not very expandable."
"The system has dual controllers but does not have a high level of resiliency built-in."
"Self-backup is the only feature lacking in this solution."
"I would like to get a weekly report of how our storage has been used, and if there is any storage sitting there not being used."
"We would like to see more cloud support, which we know is coming, although it's not out yet. It's going to be released in the next versions. That would be the biggest win, if additional cloud support is built into the array."
"There's always an opportunity for new feature functionality."
"Pure Storage FlashArray could improve in the area of cryptographic information in the consoles. The user-friendliness could improve. The Pure Storage FlashArray team should come and log into the system with their maintenance credentials and then pull out the information as evidence of cryptography."
"This product has only two active controllers, whereas other solutions can have more. This is something that needs to improve."
"The interface to manage it could be improved. I was looking at OneView. Something basic like that should be available with the 3PAR. OneView has all the bells and whistles, all the features, but I think something basic and similar to that should be come with the 3PAR, at least for monitoring managing it."
"During the initial setup, it was a bit complex in the wiring of the cages."
"The product is quite expensive."
"We have had some bad issues on stability."
"I'd really it to be able to interact with older 3PAR storage, and possibly even non-HPE. I would like to be able to pull stuff off of old things and bring it up to the standard that has been set, simply, quickly, and efficiently. That would be a really nice feature. Right now it is a big pain. It seems to work but we tend to get some latency behind."
"Generally, the management of the multiple systems that we have is really the only problem, always having to go to all these separate tools to manage everything."
"In new releases, I'd really like to see it more targeted towards hyper-converged. They are working that way with Greenlake and integrating their own "build your own" expansion environment within 3PAR."
"The newer versions have some other characteristics that we are not using. We would like to use them and set them up in our current version."
"It may need more flexibility to fight with other competing arrays."
"The solution's configuration is not flexible."
"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."
"Technical support needs to be improved, as there are no longer partners in our country."
"The solution can improve on the replication features."
"The high cost of the product is an area of concern, so from an improvement perspective, the tool needs to be made cheaper."
"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."
"NetApp is costly when compared to Dell."
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.