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."It is easy to deploy and it's all-flash, so it's very fast."
"I find two features of Pure Storage most valuable. The first is the "safe mode" function, and the second is its simplicity."
"Pure Storage FlashArray's overall speed is its most valuable feature."
"The amount of throughput that we're getting is really nice."
"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."
"They have really good baked in analytics to show you trends for growth history, so it does help with future planning for data growth."
"Cost, racial per terabyte, and speed is why we chose PureStorage. It was no brainer."
"The predictive performance analytics is a very good feature, as our system is performing better than before."
"The solution has improved our throughput by helping us keep up with the demand and acquisitions that we have been going through."
"This solution has given us improved application uptime and performance."
"It works well and we don't have any issues with this solution."
"It all works in concert using Recovery Manager Central (RMC). HPE coordinates it all, so it is more of a solution instead of products trying to do things together."
"The deduplication is pretty impressive because it will shrink. We also do some clones in addition to the snapshots, where we can have multiple clones. These reduce the actual written storage by as much as 50 percent."
"I am impressed with the product's online upgrades."
"3PAR is easy to keep running and does not require too much effort. It has been very reliable, which is key."
"The solution is easy to use and very stable."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The solution has tiers inside which means we do not only need to use SSDs."
"Saves space with deduplication"
"Most valuable features are its ease of use, robust Snapshot functionality, and that you can use it in two datacenters with SnapMirror-ing."
"The most valuable feature of the NetApp FAS Series is its stability."
"The most important features are SnapVault, Snapshots, and SnapMirror."
"Data consolidation and visualization."
"Compression of the backup Oracle by RMAN on NFS saves space 5:1."
"Storage. There could be better storage."
"If we suddenly dump large amounts of data onto the storage system, it takes a while to process it."
"I would like to see some improvements on the FlashBlade side around the CIFS space support. I am not super familiar with all the different NAS protocols that they run on their box, but there could be some improvements made on SMB CIFS side."
"The initial setup of the product is complex."
"As partners, we should have the option to download the software, rather than have to go back through Pure to obtain it."
"Automation could be simplified."
"We have not seen a reduction in our TCO nor have we seen ROI."
"I feel like there is too much automation; the user doesn't have any manual input."
"As a management tool, it would help us to have more customer reports."
"I would like them to improve it so I can do firmware upgrades without downtime."
"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."
"I would like to be able to deploy and manage 3PAR within OneView Global Dashboard so we do not have to use the interface for 3PAR."
"During the initial setup, it was a bit complex in the wiring of the cages."
"The Unified Multiprotocol Access to the storage array needs to be improved."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ is at its end of life and they are forcing us to purchase new hardware. They will no longer support this solution. They should provide support for a longer time. For example, 10 years instead of five years."
"The solution must be vertically and horizontally expandable."
"The high cost of the product is an area of concern, so from an improvement perspective, the tool needs to be made cheaper."
"I’ve found that I use command line more often than I thought needed. Some things should be done in the GUI, and command-line switches can be overwhelming and take up a lot of time."
"As I see it, there could be more interfaces, more cache, etc."
"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."
"The WAFL is slow."
"The user interface could be improved to have better graphics and the performance analyzer could be better."
"Installation of the additional switches and ETP could be improved."
"Needs more SAN support."
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.