We performed a comparison between HPE EVA and IBM FlashSystem based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."HPE has reliable support for HDD replacement."
"It is very stable."
"There have been no fail-stop failures for the last five years."
"The solution's most valuable feature is storage provisioning, which allows me to easily provision the disk space on the servers."
"The FlashSystem 900 consistently delivers performance below 1ms for read/write. This performance is essential for an effective SVC stretch-cluster configuration across two datacenters, and presenting active-active storage to the customer."
"High availability and enhanced security; Proven dependability; Data compression with hardware acceleration; Advanced copy services features are all in this product."
"The solution allows for easy migrations from previous products or vendors via its embedded storage virtualization function."
"I like most of the features. Its speed, performance, and availability are valuable. We are implementing the data reduction technology the most."
"Flash disk with Easy Tier option"
"IBM FlashSystem is a flexible solution with plenty of features."
"The most valuable features in IBM FlashSystem are IOPS, performance, duplication, and compression."
"The speed and the ease of installation are the most valuable features."
"I faced some issues during the disk replacement process in HPE EVA."
"Performance could probably be improve with faster controllers, but it is already an old device. We do have performance problems now, but it is a rather old device, so we have what we have."
"The interface of this solution could be improved."
"The design is a little old-fashioned and could be updated. The rack is very primitive and designed in an older style."
"Cloud file sharing is an area that needs improvement."
"The ease of installation should be improved. We had issues with the configuration model."
"This product lacks some of the options we wanted. For example, expansion was difficult and it required a lot of patching to be done."
"I would like to see bigger modules."
"The data reduction pool feature sucks and is not recommended for use with heavy workloads."
"In the next release having the next level of high-speed performance would be great."
HPE EVA is ranked 9th in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 4 reviews while IBM FlashSystem is ranked 2nd in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 106 reviews. HPE EVA is rated 8.6, while IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of HPE EVA writes "Has the ability to automatically deal with faulty disks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". HPE EVA is most compared with HPE 3PAR StoreServ and HPE StorageWorks MSA, whereas IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, Dell Unity XT and NetApp AFF. See our HPE EVA vs. IBM FlashSystem report.
See our list of best Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) vendors.
We monitor all Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) 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.
