We performed a comparison between NetApp AFF and NetApp NVMe AFF A800 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Offers excellent features like efficient data reduction, a reliable SafeMode, and a great support model for continuous assistance and updates."
"It's helped us because we've changed fundamentally what we talk about. We don't talk about storage and different tiers of storage anymore nor do we talk about servers. We talk now about applications and how applications impact the business and end users."
"The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes."
"What I really like about this program, is that it is easy to use and easy to configurate."
"The high availability of the product is the most valuable feature."
"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."
"We're able to get higher-density workloads on the same infrastructure, and we have a smaller physical footprint. The performance is excellent – during our test the bottlenecks are never on the X array, it just keeps picking up the pace to match what you need. The real-time visibility is a differentiator in my opinion."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe will quickly overcome all the hurdles you face, including network and latency issues."
"The most valuable feature is speed."
"The stability is solid. It doesn't fail on us, which is exactly what we want. We are in a critical business that we can't have any percentage of downtime."
"The scale up version of it is the most valuable feature. You can go to 24 nodes, which is very cool."
"Tech support has been absolutely amazing. I think on the technical aspects as well, my staff is able to get great support from the NetApp technical support resources that we have. What I love about NetApp is they have a health care division. At times, it's such an amazing thing because if we have a healthcare-related issue, there's no one better than having prior CIOs from health care organizations that NetApp has hired, and that are part of the health care team, to help out with any of those initiatives and support problems. Support has been absolutely phenomenal."
"The ability to do SnapMirror or SnapVault for data resiliency and backup."
"Easier to manage with the clustered system and everything with the newest ONTAP 9."
"The most valuable features are deduplication and compression, so we get more out of our storage. The replication is also important."
"The most valuable features are high performance and encryption. It also provides aggregate level dedupe."
"Low latency is the most valuable feature."
"You can easily scale up, and scale-out."
"The storage features are valuable."
"The most valuable features are stability and performance."
"The product can be scaled vertically as well as horizontally."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a product that is fast and provides a fast I/O."
"During the use cases of the solution, its reliability and suitability are the best."
"Over the eight years, we've been using NetApp with ONTAP, we've never lost a bit of data, and we've only experienced a few minutes of downtime in that entire time."
"In the future, I would like to see integration with enterprise backup systems."
"We would like to see VNC integration or be able to use Pure Storage with VNC."
"It is on the expensive side."
"Our use cases require more multi-tenant capabilities and additional VLAN interfaces for separating different customers. We currently use it to provide storage, sometimes shared storage, to different customers, but it is less flexible in comparison to a dedicated solution."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"In the next release, I would like to see real-time analytics for further insight into consumption models."
"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."
"The software layer has to improve."
"The cost of this solution should be reduced."
"Cleaning up false positives on alerts. We get a lot of those."
"I would like it to be an IP as our network is mainly IP-based."
"This is an expensive solution that could be cheaper."
"Its integration could be improved."
"I don't work on the technical side of things, so it's hard for me to highlight areas of improvement, but maybe the price could be a little better."
"I want an interface through ONTAP that look more like what it does for the E-Series with Santricity."
"They should make these features a little more affordable."
"Increasing the RAM, and including physical cords would be beneficial."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The initial setup should be easier, and more like a plug-and-play approach."
"The support can take a few days to have a response. However, the response that we do receive is very informative."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"Stability is an area with a certain shortcoming where the solution needs to improve"
"The cost of the solution is quite high. It would be ideal if they could adjust it so that it's a but less."
"The product’s UI could be better."
NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays with 281 reviews while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is ranked 7th in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays with 10 reviews. NetApp AFF is rated 9.0, while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp NVMe AFF A800 writes "Very easy to manage, highly stable and offers robustness of the CLI, API, and GUI ". NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, Pure Storage FlashArray and VMware vSAN, whereas NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Huawei OceanStor Dorado, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, NetApp ASA and Pure Storage FlashBlade. See our NetApp AFF vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 report.
See our list of best NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays vendors and best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays 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.
