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."We consume less physical storage because of the solution’s deduplication and compression."
"The solution is very reliable."
"We find the ease of usability and setup valuable."
"We're getting good performance, and the compression ratio is also very good in Pure Storage FlashArray."
"The solution helps to simplify storage."
"It is always out of the box, and ready to use."
"It's easy to use, and the maintenance upgrades to get free controllers work really well."
"The top-tier support and reliable storage are the most valuable features of this solution."
"It is reliable, and it seems like a solid product. It has been working well so far."
"The most valuable feature of HPE 3PAR StoreServ is its online upgrades."
"It is fast and stable. It is really helping us a lot in terms of data store, etc."
"The predictive analytics, where we're getting notifications prior to a failure has been helpful."
"It is very stable. That is why we bought it."
"The 3PAR tool is cheaper to maintain with more storage available."
"If you design it right and implement it right, it's headache free. Just keep it there and it does what it's suppose to do."
"The optimization features move chunklets or hot spots to faster drives."
"The most valuable feature is SnapMirror."
"Better performance and lower costs."
"The strong point is that our clients like this are RadLV (Radiology Low-Value). They also use SnapMirror and MetroCluster."
"The solution is very stable and reliable"
"Good for NAS and unified solutions."
"The most important features are SnapVault, Snapshots, and SnapMirror."
"A reliable and easily managed storage system is a key performance factor. The system also has more features than we require."
"End-users like that they can rely on the Snapshot technology so they can do their restores themselves."
"Most of our upgrades have not been as smooth as they should have been."
"It's too early to tell if we've seen a reduction in total cost of ownership. The solution is expensive."
"The product should improve its response time. I have also encountered issues with its configuration."
"The price of this solution could be improved."
"I would like to see a Nagios monitoring plugin which watches the health and performance of the system. The only one available just checks volume capacity."
"Just some nit picky stuff, like allowing servers and volumes to be grouped. Therefore, it would easier to work with them in the GUI."
"The file functionality could be better."
"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."
"The tool has low storage and low performance. This can be solved by adding more disco to the solution. The product’s pricing is also suited for enterprise businesses rather than smaller ones.I would like to see better performance, UI, and compatibility with other products in future releases."
"Upgrades could be improved. We would like to see more upgrades."
"Anything new can be complex. There were some things in the initial deployment that I was not happy about. One of my directives was, "However, it's configured, ensure that it can never be overprovisioned." That one key thing was overlooked. This is why I had to have a support call last year, because it actually became overprovisioned and I had to move some stuff around."
"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 the reliability improve. While it has been a good product, the QA of the product could be done a little more thoroughly."
"We are seeing that there are some enhancements which are required in the SSMC console. There are some features that we do not see in the dashboard."
"Here in Algeria, we are facing a lot of trouble finding partners and getting support from HPE. There should be better support here in our country."
"This solution is becoming dated."
"Needs to improve the adaptive storage quality of service."
"It may need more flexibility to fight with other competing arrays."
"It's not a cheap system. It is very expensive. The pricing has been ridiculous every time that we had to renew the support."
"The adoption of flash by NetApp has also been lagging behind the trendsetters, like TMS, Nimble, and others."
"We no longer have OEM support in South Africa which is not helpful, it can be difficult. They should add an office back to the country because it was better."
"NetApp is costly when compared to Dell."
"As I see it, there could be more interfaces, more cache, etc."
"I would like to see less latency and higher IOPS."
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.