We performed a comparison between HPE 3PAR StoreServ and NetApp AFF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two All-Flash Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."They have really good baked in analytics to show you trends for growth history, so it does help with future planning for data growth."
"The most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray is its high stability level."
"The most valuable features are extremely low latency, high IOPS with VMware, inline deduplication and compression."
"It is fast and reliable. It works."
"FlashArray has many valuable features. It's very user-friendly and it has high availability, so there is comparatively less downtime. During maintenance, there is no shutdown procedure, so you can directly power off the Array and manage the shutdown process without any data loss, which is a unique feature. Managing replication and data migration is also very easy."
"The console is simple to use. It has good performance. It is easy to install, understand, and manage, with a good ratio of deduplication and compression. It is doing its job."
"The initial setup was very straightforward and very quick. It was up and running in our data center within 24 hours of receiving it."
"It helps simplify storage. When you're running Pure all-flash, you don't have to do a lot of the old Oracle best practices. You don't have to worry about putting log files on a different disk channel than the data files, and those types of issues... That has made it vastly easier to do large volumes, rapid provisioning in databases, without taking a performance hit."
"It is easy to use and understand. It is also very stable."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ has been stable."
"It is a rugged, performance system; it is trouble-free and a workhorse."
"So far, we have yet to have a disk fail on either system, other than one I forced to fail when we first got the system in. So the reliability of the 3PAR system has been outstanding."
"We're able to move things around with more agility. I can take it off one server and slap it on another in a couple of minutes... And the speed is outstanding."
"We use all the features, but some of the most valuable are the replication, priority optimization, provisioning, and deduplication. There are a lot of good features in this product."
"With the HPE GreenLake Flex Capacity, we can grow as required."
"HPE can login, fix things, alert us to things, and upgrade. We are there and aware, but we do not do the work. So, that is good."
"In terms of the footprint, it is far more efficient. It has smaller, higher-capacity drives than our older unit. In terms of space, power, and cooling, it has simplified things."
"It is stable. In my three years working with the storage, I haven't seen any issues with our NetApp product."
"The ease of use, the SnapMirror capabilities, the cloning, and the efficiencies are all good features."
"It also helps to accelerate databases in our environment. First of all, there is the reliability of things staying online and the small response time as well, from the MetroCluster, for all of the data that we're serving; and the applications are talking to the MetroCluster. It provides a very fast response time."
"It should scale far beyond our needs. I don't think we will ever hit the edge of it."
"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 speed is great. That's probably number one in terms of features we appreciate."
"The most valuable features of this solution are snapshotting and cloning."
"We would like to be able to connect to data tape for backup, specifically to the LTO backups."
"I would rate this solution an eight. To make it a ten it would have to be a little cheaper."
"The scalability of the solution is not as good as it probably could be."
"It took us a year to get it to stabilize and to get the best out of Pure."
"I would like to see some improvements on the FlashBlade side around the CIFS space support. I am not super familiar with all the different NAS protocols that they run on their box, but there could be some improvements made on SMB CIFS side."
"Automation could be simplified."
"Larger capacity and more storage ports would be the two things I'd like to see."
"It was a little costly. The price was ultimately higher than both of the other solutions that we evaluated. I'd say that's the only downside."
"Feature-wise, with the InfoSight additions, there is a lot of the stuff missing in the intelligent interface. As they grow and push, a lot of it will not tie into Hyper-V."
"I would like the documentation easy to find. There is a lot of documentation, but sometimes it is hard to find. You have to do a lot of searching to find it."
"The initial setup was easy. However, we get stuck on preconditions. We were not aware of some of the preconditions."
"I would like to see NVMe support, not only on the disk side, but also in the NVMe over Fibre Channel."
"In the next release, I would like them to make it a little easier to find where everything is in the new console. It now has the OneView look and sometimes I don't think the OneView look is enough. It's too different from the original console that was a separate system."
"We've had some issues when we were trying to upgrade, doing some firmware upgrades."
"The Unified Multiprotocol Access to the storage array needs to be improved."
"The engagement of the tool's vendor is costly."
"The initial setup was a little complex, because we weren't very knowledgeable in the NetApp at the time. We were using a third-party, and they didn't have a lot of technical individuals, so it took a while to get it out."
"Stability could be improved."
"A lot of the tools that are built into the stock, ONTAP operating system, instead of having to buy the add-ons and things."
"Better stability, not releasing features until they are fully functional, or at least giving us a software train that doesn't add them until they are fully functional and proven."
"After the three-year prepay, the extended warranty is a little expensive."
"It can get a little expensive if you need to add more disks. The cost is a pain point for us, especially in terms of expansion."
"When comparing with Pure for example, with Pure you have no maintenance anymore and with NetApp, you still need maintenance."
"It would be much better if you had it more like the way they do Metro Clusters, where they have a switch, and the storage is all attached to a switch."
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 9th in All-Flash Storage with 299 reviews while NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in All-Flash Storage with 280 reviews. HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.6, while NetApp AFF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of HPE 3PAR StoreServ writes "The product's technical support is outstanding as I can reach someone right away". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". HPE 3PAR StoreServ is most compared with HPE Primera, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, HPE StorageWorks MSA and IBM FlashSystem, whereas NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, VMware vSAN and NetApp FAS Series. See our HPE 3PAR StoreServ vs. NetApp AFF report.
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.
From what I understand of Gary’s response, can we assume that the HP 3PAR is more suitable for multi-site companies that require replication between sites, and that the Netapp is more suitable for local installations and is probably faster in terms of local backup and restore operations?
Either will after the maintenance period expires. They both offer 3,4 or 5 years upfront for maintenance and support. After that they will sting you big time for renewals.
If you have a lifecycle of say 4 years then get it upfront as there won't be any new charges due to replacements. Software wise is usually around 20% of the rrp price for annual renewal after the initial period of 3,4 or 5. Depends on the vendor.
The other part is how much your data is likely to grow as dedupe appliances such as store once and dell will charge a lot for upgrades. Again it's better to get more at the start to make sure your covered for the time frames you need.
Hope that all makes sense
Thanks you for your advise mate, any way let me know one things which one will give me the iceberg cost at the end of the day...? 3par with storeonce and switch or Netapp with additional third party storage back up let say from Dell server as storage to backup my data, app etc.
iIsee a lot of good comments on features of both Netapp and HP3Par, one important point to consider is that both these solutions offer some sort of point in time snapshots, snapvault,... these do not offer any cataloging features, A good backup solution includes a data base of backups for history. This is why you should also add either Data Protector, VEEM, Catalogic,. CommVault.,... the arrays themselves will do great snapshot recovery but without any information on the backups, the solution would be very limited.
Oh god I wondered when pure would raise its hand here. Seems to happen on every all flash post like they are desperate to sell systems.
I wouldn't touch pure they are struggling with sales against HP and EMC with xtremeIO systems. At a guess I would say they will get bought out soon by someone like Lenovo or another storage vendor.
However the topic here is HP vs NetApp and what's needed i would recommend staying on subject and not trying to promote other systems that haven't been asked about.
I would back the HP system here with data protector for backup. NetApp as someone else mentioned has big issues with their all flash hence why they bought an all flash competitor solid fire so that they have a proper all flash offering without WAFL
Hello, i am not familiar with 3Par storage but i can tell you great things about the PureStorage all-flash-arrays. We installed the FA-450 and an M50 and the performance is unbelievable!! Both pump through 200,000 32K IOPS. All redundant hardware and fantastic customer service.
Will there be any offsite replication ?
So if I understand what you're asking, you want to know if there is any
kind of premium to being able to back up the 3par array? The answer is no,
but there is software specifically available to do snapshots (Virtual Copy)
and for special direct-to-disk backup from a 3par to an HP StoreOnce
de-duplication appliance from Oracle or SQL Server. Feel free to call me if
you need further explanation.