We performed a comparison between DDN IntelliFlash and Tintri VMstore based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Tintri VMstore came out ahead of DDN IntelliFlash, as our reviewers found DDN IntelliFlash more difficult to deploy, more expensive, and requiring improvement in its support.
"The most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray is its high stability level."
"Performance, deduplication, compression, and fast response time for requests from servers and applications."
"Pure Storage FlashArray's overall speed is its most valuable feature."
"It has improved my organization because now have lower latency, we get fewer complaints from customers, and we see a constant response time."
"It's easy to use, and the maintenance upgrades to get free controllers work really well."
"It is noticeably easier to manage than other appliances that we have."
"The tool is simple and easy to use. It has neat features like protection from device removal. Moreover, you can undo the deletes. The solution is easy to work with and not as complicated as CAC"
"The most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray is the all-flash storage performance, low latency, and efficiency of their de-duplication technology. Additionally, the ease of use is good compared to other storage systems. The features in data protection, snapshotting, and replication between data centers and sites are superior to other solutions."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"EasyTier/hotcaching: Valuable because it allows greater performance than standard SAS disks"
"It's very fast. We were seeing read latencies of less than one millisecond. It is robust."
"High performance and ease-of-management are the most valuable features."
"It has reduced our electricity usage by reducing the amount of disks needed for the virtual environment."
"It performed great originally, and when it performed great, it was awesome."
"It provides a combination of all the protocols that you need, without losing deduplication and compression."
"Data Compression: Up to 80% space reduction in the database"
"I've worked on both EMC and NetApp SANs, and this is by far the easiest system to maintain"
"Performance, cost, and ease of storage management."
"It is a set and forget environment with a very good tooling to view performance and delivers the IOPS we need for our VDI environment."
"Its speed has been absolutely fantastic."
"Simplicity of installation and management, high IOPS, management per VM, QoS, power and space saving."
"The data encryption feature adds a valuable security enhancement with no impact on performance."
"The Deduplication feature in VDI environments. If Tintri says we can host 3000 VMs in our storage, I know we can host 3000 VMs there. Believe the results."
"It is fast and reliable. There hasn’t been a single failure in three years of use."
"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."
"The product should improve its response time. I have also encountered issues with its configuration."
"Areas for improvement would be the financial operations. In the next release, I would like to see a NAS protocol included."
"In the configuration, which we brought in or tested it in, it has a very limited config as far as the array goes. That said, it still did more than our anticipation."
"It is way in excess of what we need. If anything, we could see a bit more speed. I'm just comparing it with what some of my colleagues who are implementing their own systems do."
"We would like more extended historical data to help with some of the capacity planning. This is something that we are asking for all the time. E.g., what was the historical performance of this particular volume? So, we would like more historicals."
"It took us a year to get it to stabilize and to get the best out of Pure."
"There are a lot of things to improve."
"Technical support is bad. It'd grade them at 30% or 40%. The response time is terrible."
"Snapshots are not as easy to access as on a NetApp device."
"In the proxy section you can’t choose a user account and password, so it is not allowed at the moment to go out, if customer has such constellation."
"It only keeps one hour of real-time data without the ability to do deep analysis of each element."
"They need to offer better integration for a virtual platform to enable you to create hyper-converged solution."
"Performance is horrible now. Our original intent was to buy new storage in about two years. But since it became a critical urgency for us, we decided to purchase a new one in two or three months."
"We had just one small stability problem with power flapping and it did not start up again automatically. We had to access service ports and manually restart the storage processors."
"It's somewhat scalable, but maybe not so much as some of the competition."
"I'm waiting to see the Kubernetes package. I know they're releasing one, but I haven't seen it yet."
"What I feel would be nice, in terms of a wishlist, is scalability. Rather than replacing the whole appliance, I would like to be able to just add another unit and scale it like that."
"Detailed reporting is missing in the current version. We would like to see this feature added in a new release."
"The Tintri OS and GlobalCenter software do a great job of showing you troubled VMs, however it still could be a bit more helpful in diagnosing the issues."
"I would like to be able to add more storage capacity to our 2 units down the road with out buying an additional seprate array."
"I would like it to have the ability to store data other than virtual machines. At the moment, you can only connect VMs to it, and that’s a bit disappointing."
"Active/active cluster between two Tintris on Hyper-V cluster."
"The Tintri Analytics site is excellent for long-term trending, but more data would be great."
Earn 20 points
DDN IntelliFlash is ranked 29th in All-Flash Storage with 11 reviews while Tintri VMstore is ranked 15th in All-Flash Storage with 61 reviews. DDN IntelliFlash is rated 7.4, while Tintri VMstore is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of DDN IntelliFlash writes "Good features with an easy initial setup but technical support is slow ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tintri VMstore writes "We were able to push a button—it really is that simple—and flip primary and secondary storage locations". DDN IntelliFlash is most compared with VAST Data and NetApp AFF, whereas Tintri VMstore is most compared with Dell PowerStore, HPE Nimble Storage, VMware vSAN, NetApp AFF and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI).
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.
