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 Pure1 component is most valuable at this point in time when comparing it with EMC. Pure1 is where you can have your diagnostics in the cloud, so you can look at things from your mobile phone."
"What I really like about this program, is that it is easy to use and easy to configurate."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The standout features for us in Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its robust DDoS protection, seamless transparent failover, and failback capabilities ensuring high availability."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe has low latency and high Ops. It is an evergreen model."
"High performance and ease-of-management are the most valuable features."
"Data Compression: Up to 80% space reduction in the database"
"It has reduced our electricity usage by reducing the amount of disks needed for the virtual environment."
"It's very fast. We were seeing read latencies of less than one millisecond. It is robust."
"It provides a combination of all the protocols that you need, without losing deduplication and compression."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"EasyTier/hotcaching: Valuable because it allows greater performance than standard SAS disks"
"It performed great originally, and when it performed great, it was awesome."
"Its performance is amazing. Since I have put Tintri in, I haven't had a complaint from anybody about slowness. On top of that, there is block-level cloning and the ability to spin up VMs."
"It has easy setup, easy administration, and no LUNs!"
"We love the real-time replication, ease of use when connecting our servers to the storage, and the level of redundancy inside the box... It's also simple software and integrates well with VMware so we get a lot of information about all of the VMs, how they're performing individually, and about network latency. That's very helpful when you're troubleshooting a slowdown."
"Upgrades are super easy and can be done during business hours without interruptions in production."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution was how fast it worked on behalf of VDI desktops."
"We also find the detail per-vm reporting at the ability to see reports from the hypervisor straight back to the storage useful."
"The most valuable feature is the VM management."
"It is great for finding problems where VMs are hogging all the performance."
"Efficiency improvements would always be welcome, but I'm not sure if they could get more efficient."
"We would like to see more visibility into garbage collection and CPU performance in the GUI."
"The UI for this solution needs to be improved."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in catering to midrange storage needs, especially for customers seeking Enterprise-class features."
"I want to see Pure Storage not only be for fast storage, but I want to see it be for the entire data center."
"Technical support is bad. It'd grade them at 30% or 40%. The response time is terrible."
"They need to offer better integration for a virtual platform to enable you to create hyper-converged solution."
"It's somewhat scalable, but maybe not so much as some of the competition."
"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."
"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 only keeps one hour of real-time data without the ability to do deep analysis of each element."
"On the software side, I suggest adding integration with backups software like CommVault Simpana or Veeam where these products can integrate with the array and trigger things like snapshots for backup, etc."
"Their support staff just doesn't have the experience with all of the products that we're running. They don't know the 850 series like we do because it's five years old. There is a little bit of a gap, and that may just be because we're an old customer running on platforms that their staff hasn't seen. I would like to see an improvement in their in-depth knowledge of their older products."
"I think with the world soon becoming only SSD, possibly NVMe, and 3D Xpoint. It would make sense for Tintri to drop the hybrid array down the line."
"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."
"Tintri need to be able to innovate faster but maintain the quality of their features."
"The product could be improved by adding iSCSI support. We have had to rethink how we implement some of our services due to this."
"The biggest area for improvement, and there has been some roadmap work in this area already, is cloud integration... Tintri has been investing in this area and I'm sure will continue to, but cloud integration has been the biggest area that we've been crossing our fingers and hoping for quick development around."
"Speed of our VDI machines. We have a very high log in and log out ratio and machines are being refreshed instantly so we have a constant boot storm on our storage."
Earn 20 points
DDN IntelliFlash is ranked 29th in All-Flash Storage with 11 reviews while Tintri VMstore T7000 is ranked 14th in All-Flash Storage with 61 reviews. DDN IntelliFlash is rated 7.4, while Tintri VMstore T7000 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 T7000 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 Pure Storage FlashArray, VAST Data, NetApp AFF and Pure Storage FlashBlade, whereas Tintri VMstore T7000 is most compared with Pure Storage FlashArray, Dell PowerStore, HPE Nimble Storage, VMware vSAN 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.