We performed a comparison between HPE BladeSystem and Pure Storage FlashBlade based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, Dell Technologies and others in Blade Servers."The solution is very easy to use."
"The solution is issue-free and works almost flawlessly."
"This has drastically reduced our datacenter space, has good cooling and power consumption."
"The scalability has been good."
"They have served different needs for us from virtualized web servers to dedicated databases and application servers."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is its upgradability and centralized configuration."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is simplified management."
"The solution is very fast and the power consumption is great."
"The ease of deployment and management has helped us simplify our storage. We also do not have to worry about capacity management as much. A lot of these things are native to Pure Storage."
"Using this solution has made our backups more reliable."
"The product is scalable and easy to expand."
"It performs well and it is also very fast."
"Speed and ease of use are the two most valuable features."
"The main feature I have found to be product replication."
"The tool's most valuable features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is performance."
"I'd like to see an all-in-one packet in the future."
"It would be nice if the solution were cheaper."
"It is lacking in the ability to replicate virtual machines more easily."
"The support you get is dependant on the region. Some regions are better than others."
"The only side that must be improved is the active-passive interconnect module architecture."
"If the hardware offered higher efficiency, that would be an ideal situation for our company."
"The latest version of this system is called Synergy from HPE, and it comes with more advanced features. This is currently the most advanced solution available in the market. One of its key features is its energy efficiency, which optimizes energy usage."
"I rate the stability of HPE BladeSystem a nine out of ten."
"I have not seen ROI."
"The solution is expensive."
"I want efficiency. FlashBlade doesn't have efficiency now."
"I would like to see more deduplication."
"I would like to see more monitoring capability included in the next release of this solution."
"It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release."
"In the realm of micro-services, I think that Pure Storage can do well if they start getting in there and making their arrays more micro-services ready."
"There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."
HPE BladeSystem is ranked 2nd in Blade Servers with 134 reviews while Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 7th in File and Object Storage with 31 reviews. HPE BladeSystem is rated 8.6, while Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of HPE BladeSystem writes "Very reliable, expands well, and is pretty simple to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "A high-performing and scalable solution that improves data performance for S3 workloads". HPE BladeSystem is most compared with HPE Synergy, Cisco UCS B-Series, Dell PowerEdge M, HPE Superdome X and Super Micro SuperBlade, whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, MinIO, Pure Storage FlashArray and Red Hat Ceph Storage.
We monitor all Blade Servers 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.
