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 most valuable feature is how it simplifies the management of the SAN."
"It is fast and reliable. It works."
"The support team is available all the time and they seem to know what they are doing."
"Lone segmentation is simpler and more agile. It's improved the velocity in overall provisioning from project to operation."
"The performance and the ever-growing maintenance are the most valuable features of this solution."
"Simplicity and reliability are the most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray."
"It's just very easy for general block storage."
"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."
"The technical support has been fantastic."
"From a single panel, I can see the performance of my service, my network, and my storage."
"It's a really stable solution. We have no problems with the customer, no negative feedback from them on this."
"The stability is what we consider to be the best feature it provides. The stability of this solution is what conquers us, every day."
"The solution fetches quick responses in milliseconds which can be within 40-50 milliseconds."
"3PAR is different from other storage solutions because it uses a chunklet when we initiate the storage. Every disk is submitted as a 1 GB chunklet. This chunklet can be RAID 1, 4, 5, or 6. This fabulous feature is very useful for me because I can distribute the RAID for any volume. The adaptive optimization is the biggest feature in 3PAR. 3PAR is very usable with thin volume because it detects zeros while writing. Every time I tell the hypervisor to make the full provisioning, it makes the volume as simple provisioning in 3PAR, not full provisioning. Other vendors take this volume as thick provisioning because of which the capacity is reached quickly. It doesn't happen in 3PAR because it detects zeros. It only writes the data, and it doesn't write zeros. There are two processors in 3PAR: the ASIC processor and the main processor. The ASIC processor detects zero writing and doesn't write it, which is a big feature in 3PAR."
"I do not have to worry about cross systems talking to each other or multiple systems trying to interact with each other. Our entire vCenter infrastructure is one large stack, which is nice."
"Tech support is great, and that is for any of their team who has ever worked with us. They are willing and committed to making sure the customer is treated the way we need to be."
"It is very easy to expand disks and manage CIFS."
"The solution is stable."
"It allows our Windows and Unix teams to have a centralized point to share data between the two."
"End-users like that they can rely on the Snapshot technology so they can do their restores themselves."
"Saves space with deduplication"
"The initial setup was so straightforward. It was well-documented."
"It has integrated snapshot and backup capability."
"The file sharing feature is most valuable."
"The data reduction that we had initially anticipated when we bought Pure and we move over, is way lower than the expected reduction. It depends on the workloads, of course. But that has been a challenge at times."
"The solution is not cheap."
"Just some nit picky stuff, like allowing servers and volumes to be grouped. Therefore, it would easier to work with them in the GUI."
"A minor issue that comes to mind is that, every once in a while, a hard drive will go bad."
"The higher education moves slowly. We are still looking forward to implementing the full list of existing features."
"Part of our company works on Dell EMC because Pure Storage did not have synchronous applications when we were purchasing our products."
"The way Pure Storage does the controller storage warranty or replacement has been an issue for some people who just replace the controllers every couple of years, and that's where some of the confusion with pricing and support has come in. They should be clear on the way the controller replacements happen, as it is important to know whether or not you can get a good return on them, because it can be a little confusing."
"Pure Storage will have issues with positioning in the near future since its a relatively new company. For now, customers need a PoC to trust using the solution, as it can't stand on its brand name alone. They need to improve Pure Storage's marketing."
"We do see room for improvement, especially in regard to expanding the defined storage areas."
"We did a firmware upgrade, and it brought the whole sandbox down. It was supposed to be done transparently, and that did not happen. It was not like we did it on our own; we had support set it up for us."
"I would like to see more flexibility with the cloud. I've actually just been in a presentation about it, here at HPE Discover 2018, so those features are coming."
"The tool needs improvement in the utilization report at the granular level."
"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."
"Generally, the management of the multiple systems that we have is really the only problem, always having to go to all these separate tools to manage everything."
"Cloud integration could be better. They can also add an NVMe to port to that. I would like to see NVMe in the next release. That's the future or the near future for storage. That will give us a real high throughput and some performance."
"Scalability and management could be improved."
"No other area for improvement comes to mind other than its price. Making the price more attractive will help this solution have a bigger market share."
"It's not a cheap system. It is very expensive. The pricing has been ridiculous every time that we had to renew the support."
"Dedicated storage efficiency accelerators could improve the overall performance of the system."
"It may need more flexibility to fight with other competing arrays."
"Cluster mode needs to be more ubiquitous."
"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."
"The NetApp FAS Series is not as high-performing and is not as fast. Its speed needs improvement, but this could only be done if it's an all-flash solution."
"There is no NetApp infrastructure set up here in Greece."
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.