We performed a comparison between Arcserve UDP and Dell Avamar based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the duplication."
"The most valuable features are the replication to the cloud and the deduplication."
"The most valuable features of this solution are that I can by just one click, copy and paste anything that I would want. I do not have to restore the whole virtual machine."
"Arcserve UDP has a good configuration and user interface. It makes the job of an administrator easy."
"Our customers are happy with the product’s functionality."
"The solution has no limitations because it does backup for Linux and Windows."
"The most valuable feature of Arcserve UDP is live replication."
"One of the things that I do like about it is that it has a very good deduplication feature."
"The solution is very stable."
"Dell Avamar has a push upgrade feature that lets you simultaneously push updates to thousands of clients. I also found the self-service part of Dell Avamar helpful."
"The backup is the solution's most valuable feature. It's very reliable."
"The product has a proven track record of good backups without much of a failure ratio. It also has a good backup in terms of the compression ratio."
"The performance of Dell EMC Avamar is good."
"The most valuable feature for me in Dell Avamar is the automation, which is good for completion."
"The data reduction feature and the ease of enabling a server in a DR location are the most valuable."
"Effective in protecting the virtualization system and end points."
"We cannot restore each user's mailbox. Each user's mailbox should be independently restorable. Also, this solution is very slow. If you select all of the servers, it runs for a long time... It needs to be faster. Finally, If anything happens to one server we should be able to switch to another server."
"The solution could improve by being more user-friendly. It can be difficult to assign destinations and choose which files and folders we need to back up. There are some aspects that are unclear."
"The initial setup was complex."
"Its interface can be improved. I find it unintuitive."
"In the most recent version of premium plus the replication has been removed, and it should re-added to the solution."
"It takes much time to verify and consolidate images for backups."
"Based on my experience, whenever we need support, there are difficulties with communication when trying to resolve the issue."
"The product is not user-friendly."
"It would be helpful if the product offered more integration potential."
"Avamar is not the best tool when it comes to taking Azure backups. Like Commvault, if Avamar can support VM-level backups for the cloud, that would make it a bit better."
"When you get down to doing certain things, such as somebody wants a particular file restored, the process by which you do that is stupid. You kind of have to know exactly where to look for in order to find it. Even on older backup products that I've used, I didn't have that kind of problem. If we were looking for a file with a particular kind of a name, the solution would find that file anywhere irrespective of where it resides within the backup system. So, we didn't have to know the name of the specific server, the specific timeframe, almost all the characters of the file name, and all kinds of data in order to find a file. In Avamar, we got to know these details. We've gone around and around with them on that, and their attitude seems to be that it is working just fine. There is nothing for them to improve. The organizational system of other products that I'm working with, such as Zerto and Cohesity, seems to be centered around the tasks that you would most commonly do and want to do, as opposed to we've laid it out in a really neat technical hierarchy."
"The solution should improve its tape-connectivity features."
"It was challenging to back up our Exchange database, which is one of the reasons we did not continue using this solution."
"The interface has room for improvement. It's not ideal right now."
"If you need to pull data out of it to offload to tapes, that's messy. You have a mechanism for it, but it is painful."
"I have found the support from Dell EMC Avamar to be not as good as Veeam. The time it takes to receive support could be improved. However, once we have the support the agents are knowledgeable and helpful."
Arcserve UDP is ranked 18th in Backup and Recovery with 41 reviews while Dell Avamar is ranked 12th in Backup and Recovery with 81 reviews. Arcserve UDP is rated 7.6, while Dell Avamar is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Arcserve UDP writes "Global deduplication, stable, and flexible licensing options". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Dell Avamar writes "Stable, integrates well with other solutions, and has a good price, but its UI needs a refresh". Arcserve UDP is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Acronis Cyber Protect, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), Veritas Backup Exec and Rubrik, whereas Dell Avamar is most compared with Dell PowerProtect Data Manager, Veeam Backup & Replication, Dell NetWorker, Dell PowerProtect DP (IDPA) and Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain). See our Arcserve UDP vs. Dell Avamar report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery 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.
