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."My rating of Pure Storage is a ten out of ten because of the price for performance and footprint - the overall value."
"The most valuable feature of the Pure Storage Flash Array is the blazing fast monitoring."
"This solution has improved our organization. In the past, we had reports that were taking up to two hours and after switching to SSD storage the overall processing power dropped to half an hour. The end users saw an immediate performance gain."
"FlashArray has many valuable features. It's very user-friendly and it has high availability, so there is comparatively less downtime. During maintenance, there is no shutdown procedure, so you can directly power off the Array and manage the shutdown process without any data loss, which is a unique feature. Managing replication and data migration is also very easy."
"The initial setup was really straight forward."
"We like the speed. It's very low latency. In virtualization, you can mask lots of problems, and even in code you can mask lots of problems, with low latency. It's just pure speed and low latency."
"It is all-flash. This makes it a lot faster than the rest of what we have, as it is able to drive high I/O loads, which is big for us."
"Pure gives us better compression, it's easier to manage, a lot less hands-on."
"It is very stable. That is why we bought it."
"The solution has improved our throughput by helping us keep up with the demand and acquisitions that we have been going through."
"The availability of the server has given us increased stability in our environment."
"We can do more, faster, whether it's spinning up more virtual machines or handling large amounts of data."
"The solution is quite stable and scalable."
"From a single panel, I can see the performance of my service, my network, and my storage."
"The support is really fast. There is very good support for 3PAR storage."
"We're hosting virtual infrastructure on the 3PAR storage and it's been very good for that."
"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."
"Most valuable features are its ease of use, robust Snapshot functionality, and that you can use it in two datacenters with SnapMirror-ing."
"I have found all the features useful in NetApp FAS Series."
"The support is very good."
"Using the built-in Snapshots and SnapMirror technology, we were able to have better working data protection locally and off-site."
"We can manage our applications from a single dashboard."
"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."
"The solution has tiers inside which means we do not only need to use SSDs."
"I would rate this solution an eight. There's always room for improvement, nobody is perfect to get a ten out of ten. They do what they do well. It's not cheap but we it's for uses that we needed."
"It was a little costly. The price was ultimately higher than both of the other solutions that we evaluated. I'd say that's the only downside."
"Part of our company works on Dell EMC because Pure Storage did not have synchronous applications when we were purchasing our products."
"The internal garbage collection process has been fixed recently in some OS updates so it is more efficient but that could be just a little better."
"As long as they always improve on IOPS speed, that's all we're really looking for. The faster the storage can be the more we can do speed of application and speed of use."
"I had to contact customer support when a drive failed as I was doing a couple of OS upgrades."
"The price of Pure Storage FlashArray could be better."
"I think replication is one area that still needs improvement. Earlier, Pure Storage FlashArray only had IP-based replication. There was no API-based replication, but they have enhanced the feature now. However, they need to work on API replication for C-type of arrays."
"3PAR did not increase our performance, and it has increased our latency by at least double."
"I would like to see the ability to be able to migrate to newer versions of the 3PAR without having to take any of our data offline and be able to upgrade on the fly."
"The management interface is not intuitive."
"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."
"HPE gives you how to get everything going, but it would be nice if they could go a little deeper sometimes. That is always the case: To get the value-add, you have to pay for those services."
"HPE could improve by making an old flash system in order to compete with the current market. For the solution to be more competitive in the mid-range market they could increase the performance."
"We need longer names for our volumes. Now it's only 28 characters. It should be 64, or at least more than 32 characters."
"I would like to see a little better integration with OneView and provisioning ESX Hosts."
"There is room for improvement in deployment and configuration processes."
"They should add new features to the product."
"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."
"It could be more flexible in terms of configuration."
"The user interface could be improved to have better graphics and the performance analyzer could be better."
"The only downside is in ease in management; it is not easy to use."
"The one aspect of the solution that's negative for us is also more unique to us due to the fact that we did a MetroCluster. The tiebreaker piece that does the monitoring of the two different locations, and determines if one is not talking to the network normally (or if it's truly down) is a little difficult. It feels like it was not designed from the beginning to fit well into the other pieces. It feels like it was thrown in at the last minute and it is not smooth."
"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 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.