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 scalability options are very nice because you can scale it much better and faster. The scalability was there in the previous environment also, but this is far better than what we had before. It basically helps the user in case they are looking for more storage. We can scale it much faster."
"The most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray are the management view of the solutions, ease of provision, and deprovision, it is fantastic."
"The solution helps to simplify storage."
"At this point, I don't know anything that they could provide in a better way."
"Processes that used to take 40 minutes to two hours can be completed in five minutes."
"The back-end data reporting for Pure Storage is phenomenal. The data that you can see on the performance of your customers' array, so you can be proactive about upgrades or enhancements, and is a phenomenal tool to have access to as a partner. I haven't seen this type of stuff out of anything of the other storage systems."
"Very stable; no worries about how much it can handle."
"The solution is very reliable."
"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."
"It allows us to cohost as needed. We are able to put more systems on one data storage system and it is still able to deliver the availability and speed that we need it to deliver."
"The technical support is good."
"Scalability, because our customer is fast growing and our solution should be able to start very small and grow very quickly."
"We're hosting virtual infrastructure on the 3PAR storage and it's been very good for that."
"The solution’s deduplication functionality works great. We are getting about a 16:1 dedupe ratio on our VM workloads."
"The solution is easy to use and very stable."
"The most valuable feature when we purchased it was that it was a four-node system."
"The file sharing feature is most valuable."
"The most important features are SnapVault, Snapshots, and SnapMirror."
"NetApp FAS Series is simple to set up."
"I like the unified management feature because sometimes you end up running a single protocol on the entire system."
"We can manage our applications from a single dashboard."
"It has integrated snapshot and backup capability."
"The solution has tiers inside which means we do not only need to use SSDs."
"The solution is very stable and reliable"
"We need to add more storage in Pure Storage FlashArray with the cluster mode activated for us to have better performance."
"A year ago they promised that they would be able to read through the database encryption with more metric and they have not delivered on that patch, which is significant because it gives us back so much more storage room. We want to be able to read through the encryption."
"It is not possible to create a cluster on top of multiple arrays."
"Having something native in the Pure Storage ecosystem would make it integrated and in one single company, and we wouldn't have to work with multiple organizations."
"Areas for improvement would be the financial operations. In the next release, I would like to see a NAS protocol included."
"I would like to see support for NVMe, end-to-end."
"Larger capacity and more storage ports would be the two things I'd like to see."
"This product has only two active controllers, whereas other solutions can have more. This is something that needs to improve."
"I would like to see NVMe support, not only on the disk side, but also in the NVMe over Fibre Channel."
"The tool needs improvement in the utilization report at the granular level."
"The cloud-based monitoring Infosight would be better if users are automatically enrolled in the cloud/group based on the configuration or information gathered or uploaded on the internet."
"The GUI interface could be improved. I have been having trouble with one issue in particular. If you look at the DC and DR, if there is a communication break and the link went down—so the data is not replicating from DC to DR—there is no way to find out how much data is ready for transmission. Only the size of the data that needs to be transferred after the link comes up. If the firewall link is down, there is no way of seeing how much data is waiting to be transferred. This is a weak point of 3PAR."
"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 do not use Memory-Driven Flash in the old 3PAR. Perhaps we will use it in the new 3PAR. That is part of the reason why we are upgrading."
"I need flexibility for interoperability across multiple platforms, not just HPE."
"The initial setup was easy. However, we get stuck on preconditions. We were not aware of some of the preconditions."
"The high cost of the product is an area of concern, so from an improvement perspective, the tool needs to be made cheaper."
"The AutoSupport could be improved to be more proactive in certain cases."
"The adoption of flash by NetApp has also been lagging behind the trendsetters, like TMS, Nimble, and others."
"It's not a cheap system. It is very expensive. The pricing has been ridiculous every time that we had to renew the support."
"For long term partnership in Myanmar, the local warehouse should be built in Myanmar that's something I'd like to see. We have some issues with supply so there is sometimes a delay in getting the hardware."
"Its operating system is very cumbersome. However, after you set it up, it runs pretty smoothly. Its file system is not very dynamic. It is very static."
"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 FAS Series should introduce an FTP application for the broadcast and post-production market."
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.