We performed a comparison between Pure Storage FlashArray and Reduxio [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage."The solution is very straightforward to set up."
"The duplication algorithm allows us to get a lot more use out of less storage. We're running a five terabyte array right now and we're running probably about 30 terabytes on it. So the duplication rate is pretty phenomenal, without a cost to performance. It still runs pretty smoothly."
"The initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward."
"It has benefited my organization because it has reduced time to insights."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reliability."
"One of the best features is the support, which is excellent."
"The most valuable features of Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its superior performance compared to other flash tiers, as well as its ease of use, with an intuitive user interface that is simple to deploy and use."
"The speed is one of the most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray."
"NVMe data storage platform that's easy to set up and easy to use. It's stable, with a lower response time, and quick technical support."
"The predictive performance analytics are good."
"There was a dramatic improvement in operating costs just as a result of the environmentals and space, let alone the cost of the unit itself."
"At this point, I don't know anything that they could provide in a better way."
"We've had to use tech support on a number of occasions. They did everything remotely and talked us all the way through. They fixed the issue within 30 minutes. Every single time we contact them, they're perfect. I would give their technical support a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is test performance. It helps us store large amounts of data along with providing us faster retrieval of data."
"The code upgrades are very smooth."
"One of the beautiful parts about it is the whole user interface. It's almost too simple. As an IT professional, you think, "Where are the works, how am I assured that this is actually protecting my data?" The ease of use in terms of deployment, and also the metrics that it feeds back to you are also among the many attractive features of the whole platform."
"Takes advantage of deduplication and compression through as much of the content of VMs which are similar."
"By using the BackDating option we can restore volumes based on time. It also reduces volumes and maintenance time."
"We are enjoying a quantum leap in speed, reliability, and available space with this system."
"The down-to-the-second restore capability, native to the device is a valuable feature."
"The whole product is based on point-in-time restore capabilities built into their storage appliance, and no one else I know does that."
"It's very intuitive, has a very modern interface. Instead of making the user set up a million parameters for things that the system knows better anyway, they put all the intelligence in the product and made the controls much easier."
"The pre-processing dedupe engine they have instead of post-processing."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"If the customer only needs 500 terabytes and doesn't care how much data they'll put in the server, IBM is cheaper than Pure."
"You cannot tag a LUN with a description, and that should be improved. What I like on the Unity side is that when I expand LUNs or do things, there is an information field on the LUN. This is the Information field that you can tag on your LUNs to let yourself know, "Hey, I've added this much space on this date". Pure lacks that ability. So, you don't have a mechanism that's friendly for tracking your data expansions on the LUN and for adding any additional information. That's a downside for me."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"It is on the expensive side."
"We've seen that when we create a POD in synchronous mode, it increases the latency."
"Right now, the box itself is just strictly working as a backend storage system. It would be fantastic if we could access it directly like a NAS device through network access or SIS drives. I think they have an interface, but I am not sure how good it is. If we could address a box directly on the network without having to go through a server, it would be great. The replication schemas could be improved. We are not using replication on the storage level right now. We use a different type of replication. If their replication would be as good as the one that we have, I would probably run the replication schema because it might be faster, but I don't know that for a fact. So, I cannot say that they have good replication. All I can say is that they need to inform us better."
"It's more multi-tenant functionality in their Pure1 manage portal that is lacking."
"The credentials on the iSCSI interface are only available to type in with the Chrome browser, and not with the Firefox browser."
"We haven't seen ROI yet."
"Historical analytics would be useful. At the moment, they don't have any type of application built for historical analytics."
"As partners, we should have the option to download the software, rather than have to go back through Pure to obtain it."
"We have not seen a reduction in our TCO nor have we seen ROI."
"It is not possible to create a cluster on top of multiple arrays."
"The primary drawback is the cost, which can be prohibitive for small configurations."
"It would be nice if Pure had something in its portfolio that provided higher deduplication and compression for backups."
"It would be nice feature if the GUI had an option to export the current unit configuration to a file or an email recipient. In case of a disaster, this way it would be quicker to get a replacement unit up and running again."
"I am waiting for the vSphere Plug-In with individual VM level control."
"I am waiting on a feature set in the new version which should allow me to replicate between Reduxio iSCSI SANs for disaster recovery and also to 3rd party iSCSI SANs which are cheaper for an archive or DR target."
"The latest release limits web access to the admin console via Chrome only, and that's a bit of a hassle. Would definitely prefer something less restrictive there."
"There is only thing I can think of at the moment, that would be detailed printable reports."
"Maybe it should come in stainless steel, just like its DeLorean time machine predecessor."
"the only thing I would say negative about Reduxio is the cabling was a little bit confusing at first, but now that we understand it, it's easy. It was just so different from what we've seen before. That was the only hard part to get used to. The storage array is fully redundant, so there are some cross-connect cables that you have to run, from the A side to the B side, and the B side back to the A side, and we've just never seen anything like that before. But now that I understand the design, it makes complete sense. But initially it was confusing."
"We had a brief hiccup, a brief outage, during one upgrade process, but it wasn't too extreme."
Earn 20 points
Pure Storage FlashArray is ranked 3rd in All-Flash Storage with 174 reviews while Reduxio [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in All-Flash Storage. Pure Storage FlashArray is rated 9.2, while Reduxio [EOL] is rated 9.8. The top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashArray writes "Effective provisioning, helpful support, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Reduxio [EOL] writes "Its access speed and now its recently released features makes Reduxio not only an equal, but also better than your older version SANs". Pure Storage FlashArray is most compared with Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, HPE Nimble Storage, IBM FlashSystem and VMware vSAN, whereas Reduxio [EOL] is most compared with .
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash Storage 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.