We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem and NetApp FAS Series based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NAS solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."My rating of Pure Storage is a ten out of ten because of the price for performance and footprint - the overall value."
"The support team is available all the time and they seem to know what they are doing."
"We're getting good performance, and the compression ratio is also very good in Pure Storage FlashArray."
"Because of the encryption, we have different storage and the encryption can go over both."
"NVMe data storage platform that's easy to set up and easy to use. It's stable, with a lower response time, and quick technical support."
"One of the features that my customers are really interested in is immutable snapshots. There are immutable snapshots to which your applications can be reverted back if you are hit by some kind of ransomware threat or malicious attack. That's kind of a key deal, and it is one of the selling points I use to point out to my customers the value and the features that Pure Storage brings to the table."
"We've been using FlashArray's snapshot for backups. Their replication across sites and response time are also excellent."
"The most valuable feature is that maintenance is free."
"The feature I find most valuable, is the deduplication, because the nature of the data that we are using in our current environment, has a lot of replicated data."
"The most valuable features in IBM FlashSystem are IOPS, performance, duplication, and compression."
"We are a 100% satisfied with the stability of the solution."
"IBM FlashSystem is a powerful effective storage solution. Additionally, it is user-friendly, anyone can use it."
"The speed, performance, and stability are the best features of IBM FlashSystem."
"The most valuable features of IBM FlashSystem are performance and security."
"The price-performance ratio is most valuable."
"The most valuable features are deduplication and compression, which together, enable you to have more space."
"The most valuable features are the NAS features and NetApp's excellent support."
"Reliable storage solution with an easy setup. It has high availability and makes single file restoration easy. It also has good stability and scalability."
"The migration of the volume on the cluster is very useful and easy to use."
"The SnapMirror is a good tool because, as long as you're going NetApp to NetApp, it's ultimately the fastest way to move data. We replicate everything to another site for disaster recovery."
"I like the unified management feature because sometimes you end up running a single protocol on the entire system."
"It is very flexible. It integrates well with the public cloud and other components, so everything can be API driven. Therefore, it is very easy to automate it."
"Most valuable features are its ease of use, robust Snapshot functionality, and that you can use it in two datacenters with SnapMirror-ing."
"Flexible and reliable storage solution with multiple features such as cloning, replication, and deduplication. Data migration can be done without any performance implications on the production systems."
"Historical analytics would be useful. At the moment, they don't have any type of application built for historical analytics."
"As partners, we should have the option to download the software, rather than have to go back through Pure to obtain it."
"I would like some performance analytics which go deeper than today. It should be specific to some hosts and applications. This would be good."
"I would like to see a Nagios monitoring plugin which watches the health and performance of the system. The only one available just checks volume capacity."
"They have a product, FlashBlade, which is their object storage integration, and that's something that we haven't integrated with yet. This might be an area for additional focus as it would play into scalability, because the very nature of object storage is that it's infinitely scalable."
"The initial setup was a little complex. We had some initial issues with the design and had to help correct some of the white papers for it, but it wasn't your standard use case."
"It is a bit expensive."
"There are a lot of things to improve."
"The interface could improve in IBM FlashSystem."
"This product lacks some of the options we wanted. For example, expansion was difficult and it required a lot of patching to be done."
"GUI interface should be enhanced more as there is some issues in copy services."
"Sometimes the performance is effective but it gets resolved in the process."
"AHV is Acropolis Hypervisor – A relatively new Hypervisor, robust and stable as VMware vSphere, has built-in advanced analytics and powerful operations, Self Service Portal and components for DevOps included, managed by a single pane of glass (Prism) via HTML5 and it is free of charge – That is why Nutanix is so advanced and revolutionary."
"Our customers have raised concerns about the limitations of the FlashSystem 5200 and 7300, which only offer a 32-gigabyte connection."
"The customer's expectations are what they get on the cloud, they're expecting even in the on-premises deployments, going forward."
"It is slightly more expensive, however, it all depends on your supplier."
"NetApp FAS Series should introduce an FTP application for the broadcast and post-production market."
"With scalability, we feel the system is limited."
"The one aspect of the solution that's negative for us is also more unique to us due to the fact that we did a MetroCluster. The tiebreaker piece that does the monitoring of the two different locations, and determines if one is not talking to the network normally (or if it's truly down) is a little difficult. It feels like it was not designed from the beginning to fit well into the other pieces. It feels like it was thrown in at the last minute and it is not smooth."
"When getting new hardware, always tell the account manager that you are also considering other brands. They will be forced to adjust the price lower."
"As I see it, there could be more interfaces, more cache, etc."
"Cost is always a factor. Some people choose EMC or Dell because they perceive NetApp as being more expensive."
"Cluster mode needs to be more ubiquitous."
"The product should improve its user experience."
IBM FlashSystem is ranked 4th in NAS with 106 reviews while NetApp FAS Series is ranked 2nd in NAS with 98 reviews. IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2, while NetApp FAS Series is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp FAS Series writes "Offers good performance and ". IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, NetApp AFF, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and HPE StorageWorks MSA, whereas NetApp FAS Series is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), NetApp AFF, HPE StorageWorks MSA, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and HPE StoreEasy. See our IBM FlashSystem vs. NetApp FAS Series report.
See our list of best NAS vendors, best Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) vendors, and best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all NAS 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.