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's very fast and very easy to use. It performs well and is both flexible and compatible. We like it because it's easy to use."
"All our junior partners can administer the storage arrays. It is simple and easy to use. We don't have to dedicate a whole team of full time people to work on it."
"The predictive performance analytics are good."
"We have tons of capacity on it."
"The support team is available all the time and they seem to know what they are doing."
"The initial setup was straightforward in the way that it was a database vacuum storage."
"Non-disruptive upgrades: You can upgrade at anytime without worry."
"The intelligence around the solution is good."
"We have been able to scale faster and get our applications out in much less time. We don't need to worry about the platform's ability to manage the workload, so we are pretty happy."
"The scalability is good because it is easy to add in new disks. We just add them on the fly, and they are available for use."
"With the new flash arrays, 3PAR has improved our performance."
"We have been able to back up our data more frequently now that we have everything on flash. It responds a lot faster, so the IOPs are a lot faster."
"This is a very robust product and it offers everything that we are looking for."
"It is very easy to manage. I can provision disks and monitor the performance easily."
"The solution has helped our organization reduce time to deployment by about 60 to 70 percent, because I am able to spin up new systems within four to six hours, where it used to take me two to three days."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is SnapMirror."
"It is good to have a unified storage where you can have block and file level protocols."
"The most valuable feature for us is the combining of HA and SnapMirror."
"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."
"It allows our Windows and Unix teams to have a centralized point to share data between the two."
"It is very flexible. It integrates well with the public cloud and other components, so everything can be API driven. Therefore, it is very easy to automate 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."
"The initial setup was a little complex. We had some initial issues with the design and had to help correct some of the white papers for it, but it wasn't your standard use case."
"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."
"Most of our upgrades have not been as smooth as they should have been."
"The backend of this solution utilizes an Active/Passive architecture, rather than an Active/Active architecture, which is a disadvantage, when compared to some of its competitors. Its storage capacity should be expanded in the next release."
"Automation could be simplified."
"They are doing some stuff with containers and an object search. These could be improved, because containers is one of the main topics that we are talking with our customers about."
"Storage. There could be better storage."
"Upgrades could be improved. We would like to see more upgrades."
"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."
"I need flexibility for interoperability across multiple platforms, not just HPE."
"We would like to see the ability to not only be integrated with hybrid IT, but on-prem."
"I would like to see an automatic re-balancing system or functionality for adaptive optimization."
"This solution should be easier to use."
"This solution is now at end-of-life."
"I would like to see a faster Ethernet connection. Right now, it is 10G. If they could do multiple hundred gigs to speed up the transfer from the array to the servers, that would be good. We are trying to get away from Fibre Channel."
"Cluster mode needs to be more ubiquitous."
"The product must support more drives."
"It may need more flexibility to fight with other competing arrays."
"Currently, the newest release is not HCI friendly."
"We would like to have further integration with some backup products. They have some of them already, but there could be more."
"The product should include an audit log feature."
"When getting new hardware, always tell the account manager that you are also considering other brands. They will be forced to adjust the price lower."
"Its operating system is very cumbersome. However, after you set it up, it runs pretty smoothly. Its file system is not very dynamic. It is very static."
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 6th in NAS with 298 reviews while NetApp FAS Series is ranked 2nd in NAS with 96 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 ExaGrid EX Series. 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.