We performed a comparison between Dell XtremIO and Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform 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 high availability of the product is the most valuable feature."
"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."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and performance."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use."
"The Pure1 component is most valuable at this point in time when comparing it with EMC. Pure1 is where you can have your diagnostics in the cloud, so you can look at things from your mobile phone."
"It has benefited my organization because it has reduced time to insights."
"The standout features for us in Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its robust DDoS protection, seamless transparent failover, and failback capabilities ensuring high availability."
"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."
"Very good IOPS performance"
"XtremIO is very stable."
"Performance and deduplication. This is a very robust block storage option that offers both performance and data optimization."
"The most valuable features are: complete performance and ease of use."
"The performance is good, which is important."
"The feature I like most about Dell Xtremio is its hardware quality compared to other vendors. It's clear they're continuously improving their research and development."
"Ease of management, aside from the serious performance, is the best feature."
"The guaranteed sub-millisecond response time for a 4K block."
"The performance was decent."
"We have many different types of replication, such as remote and drop local replication. All these features and licenses are already available. These are basic features available in the current model. Additionally, the performance has been good in our experience."
"The high performance of flash storage is especially valuable to us."
"The setup is very easy to manage and configure. The initial setup and takes one hour more or less."
"It's a state of the art solution in storage systems. High-availability and performance are the strongest aspects of these machines."
"It is very flexible, and it is very useful when you want to virtualize different storage from different vendors."
"Its resilience is the most valuable."
"The product provides a good storage space."
"You cannot tag a LUN with a description, and that should be improved. What I like on the Unity side is that when I expand LUNs or do things, there is an information field on the LUN. This is the Information field that you can tag on your LUNs to let yourself know, "Hey, I've added this much space on this date". Pure lacks that ability. So, you don't have a mechanism that's friendly for tracking your data expansions on the LUN and for adding any additional information. That's a downside for me."
"Efficiency improvements would always be welcome, but I'm not sure if they could get more efficient."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in catering to midrange storage needs, especially for customers seeking Enterprise-class features."
"In the next release, I would like to see real-time analytics for further insight into consumption models."
"It's more multi-tenant functionality in their Pure1 manage portal that is lacking."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"If you are looking at flash storage solutions, XtremIO doesn't offer any unique features. Most of my customers are migrating their workload from XtremIO to other formats because of this."
"Ease of use is key in the converged and hyper-converged world that requires administrators to have both hypervisor and storage skills."
"XtremIO needs to be lower priced. It also needs better endpoints and scalability."
"Dell's technical support could be better."
"One thing that should be improved is the reporting and monitoring tools. It should use real time monitoring for storage, IOPS, latency, etc."
"Scalability is something that can be improved because there is an issue when it comes to mixing versions."
"Get rid of the Java aspect of the GUI console."
"The physical architecture could use some higher levels of redundancy."
"I would like the fan noise to be automatically adjusted based on the drive's current workload."
"In terms of new features, I would be interested to see deduplication added in their next release."
"We've only faced some minor issues. For example, the documentation of some features isn't as detailed as we would like."
"In the next version I would like to see additional features like artificial intelligence and an increase in the amount of data it can store."
"One problem is that there are too many management tools for the F Series and for all the other Hitachi storage systems. There are four or five such solutions. Maybe these could be combined in the future."
"The Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform faces challenges when it comes to features like deduplication and compression. Enabling these features can lead to processor overload, resulting in performance degradation, especially under high loads."
"The life-cycle of the Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform G Series is too short. We only had approximately four or five years out of the solution before it was rendered its end of life."
"If they had a certain approach to layered storage, it would be better. For example, adaption to the browser, or having a centralized console."
More Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Dell XtremIO is ranked 26th in All-Flash Storage with 48 reviews while Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is ranked 10th in All-Flash Storage with 49 reviews. Dell XtremIO is rated 7.6, while Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Dell XtremIO writes "Suitable for high IOPS and helps get backup in ten minutes ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform writes "Leverages a 3DC architecture with VSP for disaster recovery, offering a 100% data availability guarantee". Dell XtremIO is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell PowerMax NVMe, Pure Storage FlashArray, Dell Unity XT and NetApp AFF, whereas Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is most compared with IBM FlashSystem, Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, Dell Unity XT and Huawei OceanStor Dorado. See our Dell XtremIO vs. Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform 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.
When we compare EMC XtremIO with HDS VSP F, there are quite a few things to be kept in the back of the mind:
1. The EMC XtremIO is an AFA that provides only block storage. It is a scale out system and works in terms of X-Bricks. The system can scale from 1-8 X-Bricks.
2. In terms of the benefits, the array is extremely simple to administer and support inline data efficiencies (de-dupe/compression etc).
3. While native replication wasn’t initially available, I believe it is there now as is integration with Recoverpoint.
4. In terms of positioning, we need to remember that, while it is an enterprise grade AFA and has been used to address Tier-0/1 requirements, it is still not the upper most echelon in the EMC hierarchy. The EMC VMAX all flash would be that.
5. The array relies on standard eMLC disks and there have been mentions of integration with NVMe.
6. If you are looking for metro clustering, you will need to rely on the VPLEX which can virtualize the XtremIO behind it. But this is a huge add on cost.
1. The HDS VSP F is a Tier-1 storage array that is intended for the most demanding of apps. Additionally it is among a few arrays that support mainframe connectivity (FICON).
2. HDS does not use standard eMLC drives but instead relies on HDS’s proprietary FMD drives which are pretty much similar to standard SSDs
3. The VSP F conforms to standard VSP architecture and is part of the redesigned portfolio of newer VSP systems (G600, 800 and 1000).
4. It supports enterprise grade replication, metro clustering (Global Active Device) natively.
5. HDS offers standard data efficiency features
6. HDS offers a data availability guarantee.
Comparison:
1. The selection would come down to what you are looking for. The XtremIO would probably be the less expensive option.
2. With HDS, the product has a proven stability/reliability record. The same is true to a great deal with XtremIO.
3. VSP F is treated as a tier-1 enterprise array that can deliver 6 ‘9’ availability which is not the case with XtremIO
4. HDS management interface is still pretty pathetic in comparison with EMC and HDS has never taken that seriously
5. Support is also not a huge differentiator with both EMC and HDS having global support
6. HDS is historically known for being very rigid in terms of what they allow you to do. Typically expansions, add on configs are handled by their own people which is actually not bad but generally at an add on cost.
7. In terms of market numbers, while XtremIO was EMC’s primary bread winner for the last 2-3 years, those numbers have come down and right now, the VMAX is dominating. HDS has been continuously losing market share and has not been innovating. These are things to consider.
8. In short, think about the use case, data criticality, capabilities you are looking for, level of availability, expansion etc. That should cut it. On the EMC side, do remember that, XtremIO integrates with ViPR and also with vRA. You may want to explore the VMAX option. You can start small on the VMAX and it would be a better buy in the longer run.
Conclusion:
1. For a company of around ~500 employees, I believe the XtremIO would suffice. Think about capacity and growth. The VSP would probably be an overkill unless you have a need for such capabilities.
Hello,
After trying and talking to various different NAS vendors (NetApp, EMC, Nimble, etc.)
We decided to go with PureStorage FlashBlades and we couldn’t be happier with faster I/O’s, better latency and overall very steady performance plus very low management on the IT side.
Alfred Morgan Jones did a very good job comparing EMC XtremIO and Hitachi Virtual Storage F series above. I recommend everyone to read his analysis. If someone must really make a choice between EMC XtremIO and Hitachi F series in terms of technology, reliability and support, then Hitachi F series is clear winner. Of course the nature of app. and data may change this based on whatever the criteria is. And finally money matters as well :)
Imho both Vendor´s have their pro´s and con´s. For our last Projects we do some POC´s with Pure with excellent results. So give them a try. POC with Pure is really easy to manage.
I’ve tested EMC XtremeIO two years ago, I don’t know Hitachi, but there are two things that push me to buy a Pure Storage, first is an EMC low performance with words more than 16 Kbits and the second is the design, I don’t want a big UPS in the middle of the more expensive/important storage.
Hi
Have you looked at the IBM V9000, has virtualisation software, with
microlatency modules instead of SSD drives which everyone else uses, SSD
can also be used, other disk can also be virtualised to ensure smooth
migration
www.youtube.com
www-01.ibm.com
I would recommend Hitachi.
I would consider Pure Storage, //m or //x. EMC X2 ridged upgrade policy and where it should have been 2 years ago. No upgrade path from X1 - X2 so will the same be true off X2 - X3?