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."Before we used Pure Storage it took 93 days of employees who run the database to back up and restore databases. The scale of deployment basically went from several days to a few minutes."
"It is noticeably easier to manage than other appliances that we have."
"It simplifies building out the storage."
"The most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray is the complete set of functions it provides."
"All updates, upgrades, and hardware work are all performed on-line with no impact."
"The most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray are simplicity, ease of use, and dashboard management."
"It is easy to manage. You don't have to have the same people who used to manage the Dell EMC arrays because the solution is more intuitive."
"The initial setup was very straightforward and very quick. It was up and running in our data center within 24 hours of receiving it."
"Their support is the most valuable. The support that we are getting from HP Turkey is very good. This product is better than some of the other products in terms of reliability. It is very reliable."
"They are using Ansible to automate the provisioning, so that simplifies the day-to-day operations."
"Resilience and reliability, unmatched. They take good care of us."
"HPE 3PAR has all the common storage features like cell provisioning and deduplication. Usually the solution is chosen by the customer as they have a preference, or the setup is already in their environment."
"Technical support for both 3PAR and Dell EMC in my country, Iran, is very difficult because we are under sanctions."
"The 3PAR tool is cheaper to maintain with more storage available."
"If it runs, and you don't know about it, that is the best thing that you can have in IT infrastructure. This is what 3PAR does for us."
"Multi-tier storage was the primary reason that we bought it. I also love the interface that you use for administering it."
"The replication feature is noteworthy because it's faster than most and it uses little bandwidth. Then there's the friendly interface that the equipment offers. With this interface, it is very easy to manage."
"A reliable and easily managed storage system is a key performance factor. The system also has more features than we require."
"Most valuable features are its ease of use, robust Snapshot functionality, and that you can use it in two datacenters with SnapMirror-ing."
"Adaptive balancing is a valuable feature."
"NetApp FAS Series is simple to set up."
"The most valuable feature is SnapMirror."
"The new FAS series is a good fit for some customers. We have good performance and capacity, even though it is full flash."
"It changed the way we do Disaster Recovery (DR) around NetApp replication."
"I would like to see them develop the ability to integrate with more AWS services. There are increasingly more and more services coming out from AWS but there are also certain constraints where we can't move everything over to a cloud as well. We would like for things that are on-premise to be easily integrated with AWS."
"It was a little costly. The price was ultimately higher than both of the other solutions that we evaluated. I'd say that's the only downside."
"From a scalability perspective, it is a very small storage solution, so it's not very expandable."
"The solution is not cheap."
"Part of our company works on Dell EMC because Pure Storage did not have synchronous applications when we were purchasing our products."
"We need to add more storage in Pure Storage FlashArray with the cluster mode activated for us to have better performance."
"I would like to have an easy way to determine the cost per VM so that I can present a solution to our customers."
"It would be nice to have a better view of the allocated capacity on their Platform as a Service solution because we have to do some manual calculations to understand how much we are going to pay every month to use the storage that is allocated."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ has limited flexibility in building replication solutions. There are limitations to the number of IOPS the system can do. It's not bad as it is doing its job. However, for the application, if you need a toolbox, you can build everything concerning periodic replication modes of synchronous or asynchronous three-site, four-site, with supported cascading which requires you to buy an IBM product. It also takes a few hours to one day to upgrade the system and sometimes; it takes more time because, in some HPE 3PAR StoreServ 20000 Storage, you have an eight-node system. If you do an upgrade, you do it node by node and every node might take more than an hour."
"It is suitable for medium-sized businesses and data centers with less number of users and less important data. It is not really an enterprise-level solution. It needs more capacity. It is also not really stable. It should be more stable. It should also support any server model. It is really weak in this area."
"3PAR needs to keep on increasing its capacity."
"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."
"Integration with some cloud services would be nice... We would like to be able to provision from the 3PAR and decide whether or not we are going to provision onsite or the cloud."
"Extending is not a problem, scalability is okay. But once you buy additional box of disks, you have to wait for HPE to contact you with their plan for implementation, for connecting, and it can take several weeks. So, you have the box and you have to wait for several weeks to actually implement it."
"We do see room for improvement, especially in regard to expanding the defined storage areas."
"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."
"Needs to improve the adaptive storage quality of service."
"Needs to add wizards for newer, inexperienced users."
"Currently, the newest release is not HCI friendly."
"They should add new features to the product."
"There is no NetApp infrastructure set up here in Greece."
"The WAFL is slow."
"It lacks automatic tiering, When you use data, some of it goes cold. It is not hot data, so the system should automatically move that data to the SATA, while the hot data is kept on tier-one, the SaaS or SSD drives."
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 6th in NAS with 12 reviews while NetApp FAS Series is ranked 2nd in NAS with 19 reviews. HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.6, while NetApp FAS Series is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of HPE 3PAR StoreServ writes "Reliable with a good user interface and helpful support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp FAS Series writes "Offers fast data transfer between NetApp systems and highly scalable, accommodating clusters with significant storage capacity". 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.