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 code upgrades are very smooth."
"The stability and performance are the best things about the solution."
"Cost, racial per terabyte, and speed is why we chose PureStorage. It was no brainer."
"Pure Storage is extremely reliable — it's never failed."
"It's very fast and very easy to use. It performs well and is both flexible and compatible. We like it because it's easy to use."
"Redundancy and the fault tolerance of the platform are the most impressive."
"The predictive performance analytics is a very good feature, as our system is performing better than before."
"The performance is very good."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ has been stable."
"The solution, stability, and the performance work well for us."
"The optimization features move chunklets or hot spots to faster drives."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ is easy to use and has good performance."
"Previously, we were using EVA from HPE. When we moved to 3PAR, we noticed a reduction in footprint, reduced by more than 30%. We use the Adaptive Optimization, giving us a reduction in cost and with better performance."
"We built a DR solution based on this, we can sustain our business for any amount of time, 24/7."
"This product is stable, aside from the performance problems we had."
"The product stands on its own in heavy enterprise environments."
"The solution has tiers inside which means we do not only need to use SSDs."
"It has integrated snapshot and backup capability."
"NetApp FAS Series is simple to set up."
"NAS stability"
"Saves space with deduplication"
"This solution provides us with easy management and great vendor support."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution is very stable and reliable"
"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."
"The problem is that we can only make a few groups, around five or six groups. I like groups and we need a lot of them. We had to put all the information in only a few groups and cannot make a more detailed separation of them."
"I would like the ability to swap out the network adapters into it. So, without taking out the whole controller, I would like to be able to swap adapters. This would make things easier."
"They are doing some stuff with containers and an object search. These could be improved, because containers is one of the main topics that we are talking with our customers about."
"There's always an opportunity for new feature functionality."
"Pure Storage FlashArray could improve the recent file storage capabilities because it is lacking a lot of features."
"It needs to improve its price."
"Going forward, don't complicate things for the customers."
"The solution could be improved in regard to space reclamation by adding automation."
"Security is a mandatory feature because our customer needs to protect delicate information."
"Sometimes the required upgrades have been a little bit involved: "You have to do this before you do this," and I want them to explain to me why. It's more work than it should be."
"I would like to have single click upgrades because the process is cumbersome right now."
"The only drawback on it is that tech support seems really busy. We get a critical notification when an important patch comes out, but sometimes it's a month before we can get this critical piece on because they just don't have time on their schedules to do it sooner."
"I would like an easier user interface and setup to help with deployment. There were many areas of the setup where I was like, “Why don't we do it this way?” Therefore, some of the things in the user interface could have been more refined, so you don't have to click in 5000 different places to accomplish one goal. Less clicks means more efficiency."
"They should add AI-enabled dashboards to the solution."
"3PAR needs to keep on increasing its capacity."
"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 high cost of the product is an area of concern, so from an improvement perspective, the tool needs to be made cheaper."
"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."
"We are not able to connect to the support of NetApp from Sudan. We have to go through many agents for support, which makes it difficult."
"We're supposed to have used NetApp FAS Series for replication, but then one of the nodes failed, and then it's taken us some time to bring it up."
"It could be more flexible in terms of configuration."
"Needs more SAN support."
"When getting new hardware, always tell the account manager that you are also considering other brands. They will be forced to adjust the price lower."
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.