We performed a comparison between HPE StoreOnce and Pure Storage FlashArray 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."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."
"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."
"It has good, reliable, fast storage."
"The solution is scalable."
"The standout features for us in Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its robust DDoS protection, seamless transparent failover, and failback capabilities ensuring high availability."
"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 initial setup process is simple."
"The valuable feature is the ability to work with the Veeam software to reduce the backup windows."
"Currently, VTLs can only be created on individual service sets and cannot be used to share the resources of other nodes."
"Deduplication is the most valuable feature."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its catalyst mode, along with better performance, backup, and recovery."
"I'm impressed with their support structure, call availability, understanding, flexibility in scheduling remote sessions, and accommodating customer timeframes."
"Technical support is quite good."
"The implementation is straightforward."
"We like the data reduction rates. That has been really helpful. You get 4U of Pure storage replacing something like two racks of spinning disks. One of the things that has contributed to that are the data reduction rates."
"The management features are well organized and they have a very good dashboard."
"It is an easy to use product for all of my team members."
"One of the lesser sung advantages was when we started running our interface engine on Pure Storage. The ability to process messages and pass them through in our organization skyrocketed purely because of a disk that I owned which we were getting out of Pure Storage."
"We consume less physical storage because of the solution’s deduplication and compression."
"We find the ease of usability and setup valuable."
"The deduplication and compression meet all of our system requirements."
"Having an intuitive user interface to get things running is great."
"We have run into a couple of instances recently where we are running out of space. So we have had to buy some more packs for it and they have deployed fine and it has increased smoothly."
"It is on the expensive side."
"In the future, I would like to see integration with enterprise backup systems."
"The tool's portfolio is minimal. It is expensive."
"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."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"The software layer has to improve."
"We would like to see more visibility into garbage collection and CPU performance in the GUI."
"When it comes to upgrading, it always goes block-wise. One block is 48 TB raw capacity. It would be good if they can include a smaller capacity for SMB customers. Currently, it is not possible to increase in a smaller capacity. You have to buy the exact same unit. It would be great if they can provide a smaller next block. There are around 20 hard disks, and it would be really helpful if we can add 10 hard disks initially and 10 hard disks later."
"We would like to see some improvements in the Veeam Backup & Replication integration. It's good, but it has a lot of room to improve. In particular around the inability to easily move data between StoreOnce appliances."
"HPE StoreOnce Backup to Disk (BTD) is not a good backup solution for NAS devices. It does not have a dual controller, so if one controller fails, the entire system will go down."
"In terms of areas for improvement, I believe HPE StoreOnce could learn from competitors like Dell's Data Domain and ExtraHop in refining its architecture."
"While StoreOnce has many features, it needs to focus on integrating with third-party backup software solutions."
"It is difficult to solve issues with this solution remotely. I prefer to use the knowledge base platforms. The response time could improve."
"The solution must provide backup options for smaller capacities."
"Cloud integration needs to be simplified."
"Beyond a certain amount of petabytes, you have to have a separate system. Basically, it's not infinitely scalable."
"I like what they're doing, but some of my customers complain that they do not have all the bells and whistles and knobs to fine-tune workloads that some of the competitors have. In my opinion, that's good. All customers don't have dedicated storage gurus, and they can get themselves into trouble if they fine-tune too many of those high-performance knobs, but they do get knocked down. Pure Storage takes a hit in the minds and opinions of some of the customers because they cannot customize things as much as compared to a legacy storage provider's appliance such as NetApp, Dell EMC, or even HPE. I personally think 95% of my customers are better off letting the system fine-tune itself. That was something that you needed to do 12 or 15 years ago, but now with all-flash, the technology can handle what it needs to handle. Customers just end up shooting themselves in the foot if they are tweaking too many default settings."
"Automation could be simplified."
"The credentials on the iSCSI interface are only available to type in with the Chrome browser, and not with the Firefox browser."
"We do have an issue with the vCenter integration. Pure Storage says it has a lot of free space, but vCenter says its completely full. This is because their dedupes are saved as space, but Vcenter still detects the disk as completely full. So, we do have an issue with that."
"I would like to see the NAS add-on component become more fault-tolerant than just a single virtual machine running inside the array. I'm unwilling to use it for that reason."
"I think replication is one area that still needs improvement. Earlier, Pure Storage FlashArray only had IP-based replication. There was no API-based replication, but they have enhanced the feature now. However, they need to work on API replication for C-type of arrays."
"I had to contact customer support when a drive failed as I was doing a couple of OS upgrades."
HPE StoreOnce is ranked 2nd in Deduplication Software with 102 reviews while Pure Storage FlashArray is ranked 3rd in All-Flash Storage with 174 reviews. HPE StoreOnce is rated 8.4, while Pure Storage FlashArray is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of HPE StoreOnce writes "Helps to consolidate D2D backups and has a good deduplication ratio". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashArray writes "Effective provisioning, helpful support, and reliable". HPE StoreOnce is most compared with Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), Dell PowerVault, ExaGrid EX Series, DD Boost and Veeam Backup & Replication, whereas Pure Storage FlashArray is most compared with Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, HPE Nimble Storage, IBM FlashSystem and VMware vSAN. See our HPE StoreOnce vs. Pure Storage FlashArray 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.