We performed a comparison between NetApp StorageGRID and Pure Storage FlashBlade based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two File and Object Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Duplication, interface and the manageability is good and simple."
"The implementation with NetApp went smoothly. It is a 'setup and forget' type of appliance."
"The speed of the disks removed the bottleneck from our storage."
"It has improved our operational efficiency through time consumption and logistics by 40 to 50 percent. Everything that had to do with our legacy tape solution has been improved and is now more efficient."
"The most valuable feature is tiering."
"The technical support is good."
"Cost-effective and easy to deploy."
"The ability to get to the StorageGRID from anywhere on my network. The solution is remote. You don't have to be at a physical location."
"What I like best about Pure Storage FlashBlade is its object storage functionality, plus it has fast underlying hardware. Pure Storage FlashBlade is also very stable. I find its stability one of its valuable features."
"The main feature I have found to be product replication."
"It has also helped to simplify storage for us in the way that it's easy to manage. Their automatic monitoring really helps when things break or are about to break. They see a problem coming and alert us even before our own system does."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its fast performance, especially in handling snapshots. It helps during power outages when we need to quickly move data between different data centers. It ensures efficient replication and helps maintain our data centers' uptime."
"It's very easy-to-use."
"It is very easy to use, and it is very fast."
"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."
"The solution is able to handle workloads and is easy to use. It allows us to actually manage the boxes in less time."
"The only real issue that we have run into is, when we are cloning, we cannot do a thin provision clone, it has to be a full clone."
"It has its quirks here and there, but it is an older NetApp system."
"The price is something that NetApp could improve, as with most companies. NetApp is known for not being the cheapest storage option, which is also valid for StorageGRID. There are other storage options on the market which we are aware of and have done proofs of concept for, but you cannot really compare the list prices because, as a big user of NetApp storages, we have totally different prices than some list prices. Still, the price information we got for other options are almost always less expensive than StorageGRID."
"The redundancy and reliability are great, but I also see room for improvement there. I would like to see more efficiency in the storage and dedupe/compression solutions."
"Beyond the initial setup, this product is a little bit difficult to configure."
"I would like to see them integrate more with the monitoring platforms. It is a bit difficult to get automated monitoring of the system."
"Data retrieval speed could be better."
"The processes around installation and upgrade need improvement."
"It's on the expensive side, as expected for a niche product."
"We haven't been able to use much of the cloud area of Pure Storage. We have a storage server and it would be better if it could integrate with other cloud features of this solution."
"Compared to, for example, Hitachi NAS, the solution is not mature at all. It's just in its infancy as far as technology goes."
"They need better integration with public clouds along with a better hybrid solution."
"There could be improvements in public cloud integration."
"The speed could be improved."
"File storage needs a lot of improvement. Mainframe connectivity also needs improvement because it requires additional components to be integrated with Pure Storage FlashBlade. If you want to keep your backup data, then this becomes an even more expensive solution because Pure Storage FlashBlade will not be able to meet your backup needs."
"I would like to see more VM-Aware features in the next release of this solution."
NetApp StorageGRID is ranked 7th in File and Object Storage with 12 reviews while Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 6th in File and Object Storage with 31 reviews. NetApp StorageGRID is rated 8.4, while Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of NetApp StorageGRID writes "Scalable object storage with robust data durability with efficient geo-distribution and comprehensive lifecycle management ensuring managing of large volumes of unstructured data". 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". NetApp StorageGRID is most compared with MinIO, Dell ECS, Red Hat Ceph Storage, Scality RING and Dell PowerScale (Isilon), whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, MinIO, Pure Storage FlashArray and HPE Synergy. See our NetApp StorageGRID vs. Pure Storage FlashBlade report.
See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.
We monitor all File and Object 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.
