We performed a comparison between Huawei OceanStor and IBM FlashSystem 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, IBM FlashSystem came out ahead of Huawei OceanStor. Although both products have valuable features, our reviewers found that Huawei OceanStor has complex licensing that can make the solution too expensive and needs to improve their tech support’s communication.
"The solution is very straightforward to set up."
"The high availability of the product is the most valuable feature."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe will quickly overcome all the hurdles you face, including network and latency issues."
"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 initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward."
"It has good, reliable, fast storage."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and performance."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"The solution has improved our organization by speeding up our operations."
"Generally stable with good technical support."
"Stability: The product is designed to have always HA (High Availability) with redundant network and processors."
"Huawei OceanStor is easy to manage."
"Huawei OceanStor provides numerous features that are tailored to cater to the requirements of all types of companies."
"The solution is scalable."
"Huawei OceanStor is stable."
"Huawei OceanStor has the capability of SSDs, high-performance disks, and higher disk support."
"Virtualization of external storage, while adding cache and speed to the external storage."
"The price-performance ratio is most valuable."
"This solution is convenient, user-friendly, convenient and reliable."
"Stability-wise, this solution is fine."
"IBM FlashSystem has been stable in our operations."
"The Flash core models offer amazing performance."
"The compression and deduplication features are the most valuable."
"The most crucial feature of IBM FlashSystem is compression."
"I want to see Pure Storage not only be for fast storage, but I want to see it be for the entire data center."
"We need better data deduplication."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"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."
"The tool's portfolio is minimal. It is expensive."
"The solution could improve by having better integration."
"Integration with mainstream solution technologies could be better."
"Unfortunately, this product doesn't support Flash Disks, but it's IOPS capacity is a great compromise."
"The user interface is not so user friendly."
"The solution’s reporting could be improved."
"Configuration complexity and the tools available."
"Could have a more stable, lighter Metro and better logging system."
"The duration of the built-in snapshot technology must be improved."
"The deduplication and compression ratio is not very good. It's not reaching a very high ratio."
"I would like to see bigger modules."
"I would like to have a larger disk. Right now, you can get 57 terabytes in a shelf. Once they get the larger disk and you get larger capacities, it'll be even better."
"I think the only thing the developers can look at, is that it is limited to 25 gigabytes currently. In the next release they might want to increase that."
"They can improve its initial configuration. The initial configuration is currently very difficult. There are multiple choices or alternative ways to configure based on the use case and what you are targeting out of the device, that is, more capacity or more performance. These multiple alternatives cause a lot of confusion. They should increase the processing part of the nodes. Currently, you can cluster up to eight nodes. From my experience and the workload that I am facing in my environment currently, I would like to see either a bigger or stronger node or a larger number of nodes that can be clustered together. We formally communicated to them that we need to see either this or that, and they are working on something."
"The solution's pricing is a bit high so there is room for improvement."
"The solution should improve its pricing and the mechanism in the reduction pool."
"A big area for improvement is that the data reduction pool feature is not recommended for use in a production environment because it has stability and performance issues."
Huawei OceanStor is ranked 12th in All-Flash Storage with 31 reviews while IBM FlashSystem is ranked 6th in All-Flash Storage with 106 reviews. Huawei OceanStor is rated 8.4, while IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Huawei OceanStor writes "User-friendly and robust storage solution with good performance and easy setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". Huawei OceanStor is most compared with Huawei OceanStor Dorado, NetApp AFF, Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT and HPE Primera, whereas IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Dell Unity XT and NetApp AFF. See our Huawei OceanStor vs. IBM FlashSystem 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.
