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."Technical support has been amazing."
"Pure Storage FlashArray has significantly improved our data center performance. It handles high workloads efficiently, providing better performance in the environment. With increased storage capacity, it has led to improved overall system performance. The tool's technology is a standout feature. It has helped me reduce storage costs by 15 percent."
"The most valuable feature is that maintenance is free."
"The initial setup was straightforward in the way that it was a database vacuum storage."
"The most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray are simplicity, ease of use, and dashboard management."
"We've been using FlashArray's snapshot for backups. Their replication across sites and response time are also excellent."
"The deduplication in the array combined with its snap technologies allows the product to be remotely/manually controlled or scheduled."
"The security operating system is its most valuable feature because it's very simple, easy to use, and operate. You don't have to do very serious training to operate this equipment. It's user-friendly and pretty straightforward."
"With our 3PARs, we have never lost data."
"The intelligence around the solution is good."
"OneView is a nice interface."
"For virtualization, the failure rate is much less compared to traditional storage where you need more hard drives"
"We never had a blackout and we have never been offline."
"I like that it's stable. This is the reason why we're using these products. We work in the broadcast market, and stability is very important. HPE has global services, and that's also important. Dell and HPE are some big companies, and their solutions are robust and stable."
"The 3PAR tool is cheaper to maintain with more storage available."
"3PAR is easy to keep running and does not require too much effort. It has been very reliable, which is key."
"The migration of the volume on the cluster is very useful and easy to use."
"The product is user-friendly and helps to evaluate the performance of each node. It ensures that if one node encounters an issue, the system can immediately redistribute the workload without interruptions. This setup provides uninterrupted operation for our systems."
"It has integrated snapshot and backup capability."
"It changed the way we do Disaster Recovery (DR) around NetApp replication."
"NetApp FAS is highly stable and reliable, especially under a heavy load. That is what I like most about the NetApp."
"The best feature is its ONTAP product line for Ransomware protection. It also has features for file storage and block storage. The solution is stable. We've had no issues with it. The tool is scalable and meets our requirements. The technical support and the supporting partner are great. The initial setup is straightforward. It is very easy to maintain the product. The feature set is excellent. I recommend the solution."
"Snapshot, deduplication, and compression features are valuable."
"The support is very good."
"I would like to migrate to the cloud in the future and know how that would actually work with this product."
"Beyond a certain amount of petabytes, you have to have a separate system. Basically, it's not infinitely scalable."
"If we suddenly dump large amounts of data onto the storage system, it takes a while to process it."
"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."
"I like what they're doing, but some of my customers complain that they do not have all the bells and whistles and knobs to fine-tune workloads that some of the competitors have. In my opinion, that's good. All customers don't have dedicated storage gurus, and they can get themselves into trouble if they fine-tune too many of those high-performance knobs, but they do get knocked down. Pure Storage takes a hit in the minds and opinions of some of the customers because they cannot customize things as much as compared to a legacy storage provider's appliance such as NetApp, Dell EMC, or even HPE. I personally think 95% of my customers are better off letting the system fine-tune itself. That was something that you needed to do 12 or 15 years ago, but now with all-flash, the technology can handle what it needs to handle. Customers just end up shooting themselves in the foot if they are tweaking too many default settings."
"It would be good to have metrics of the box's performance so we can see what it delivers, but currently, I can't see what it's actually doing."
"I would like to see the NAS add-on component become more fault-tolerant than just a single virtual machine running inside the array. I'm unwilling to use it for that reason."
"The setup needs to be improved the most. They can do a little more with the user interface, but the setup is what I would like to see made a bit easier."
"We have had some challenges in the Arabic implementation and in migration, but for daily work, it's fine."
"The price is a little bit high."
"I would like to see the reliability improve. While it has been a good product, the QA of the product could be done a little more thoroughly."
"From an overall perspective, all the latest technologies can improve support and performance. This is very important for us."
"They should add AI-enabled dashboards to the solution."
"The configuration and flexibility should improve."
"We need additional enhancements to InfoSight, especially from a VM standpoint. Today, we can see in the Azure VM performance stats in 3PAR, but it is so huge, we can't just drill down on each and every VM and look at its performance."
"Sadly, the support from HPE has not been all that great. It is tough to get a tech out or get a response from some of the techs that we have."
"The AutoSupport could be improved to be more proactive in certain cases."
"NetApp systems are somewhat more complex, though not excessively so. If you're transitioning from a Windows server environment to NetApp, get training or education; otherwise, you might struggle with this solution."
"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."
"The adoption of flash by NetApp has also been lagging behind the trendsetters, like TMS, Nimble, and others."
"We have some experience with older equipment end-of-life. For example, when warranty support stops or updates stop – it can be frustrating. Not all clients can buy a new filer every year or two, and NetApp ending support a bit quickly can be a concern."
"We are not able to connect to the support of NetApp from Sudan. We have to go through many agents for support, which makes it difficult."
"The high cost of the product is an area of concern, so from an improvement perspective, the tool needs to be made cheaper."
"The product should include an audit log feature."
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.