We performed a comparison between Hitachi VSP E Series and NetApp AFF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Pure FlashArray X NVMe will quickly overcome all the hurdles you face, including network and latency issues."
"It is very easy to install and configure. It has got excellent diagnostics. If you really need to see how the box is performing, the console gives you a lot of information. You can set thresholds as well as alerts based on the thresholds, which is a very powerful functionality. They are very proactive. They know how to monitor and manage the systems. They see a problem, and they are all over it before us. They see the problem before we see it, which is very good."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use."
"Pure has signature security technology, which cannot be deleted, even if you are an administrator."
"The initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward."
"The solution is very straightforward to set up."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe has low latency and high Ops. It is an evergreen model."
"What I really like about this program, is that it is easy to use and easy to configurate."
"We are using the Hitachi VSP E Series for high IOPS."
"It offers good file sharing."
"Its user-friendly configuration and maintenance processes contribute to its reputation for being straightforward and easily manageable."
"Deduplication"
"The in-line dedupe, and the compaction saves us a lot of space because most of our AFFs house VMware VMDK files."
"We recently started using the volume encryption feature, which is helpful because there are some federal projects that require data at rest to be encrypted."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its simplicity. It is easy to use."
"All of the features are good. With Flash, we have high-performing databases. Having that kind of performance has been valuable."
"We do a lot of financial modeling. We have a large compute cluster that generates a lot of files. It is important for us to get a quick response back for any type of multimillion file accesses across the cluster at one time. So, it's a lot quicker to do that. We found that solid-state performs so much better than than spinning drives, even over multiple clusters."
"The most important features are the IOPS and the ease of the ONTAP manageability."
"ActiveIQ is the most valuable feature. It's a central point for me to be able to kick into everything every day. I log in first thing and make sure there are no issues, and it helps me with my day-to-day."
"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."
"They could add more support for file storage and different types of storage."
"The tool's portfolio is minimal. It is expensive."
"We would like to see VNC integration or be able to use Pure Storage with VNC."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing of the product."
"The tool's pricing is higher than competitors."
"It's more multi-tenant functionality in their Pure1 manage portal that is lacking."
"There is room for improvement in simplifying the overall complexity of the environment."
"The graphical user interface is somewhat outdated, lacking some of the modern features found in other solutions."
"The solution's support duration or end-of-support life is very short."
"Higher communication: I love the professional services and I love everything that everyone's able to offer us, but I find sometimes we're not aware of all the things that NetApp can do."
"The stability is good but there is room for improvement with other options."
"We were migrating from Data ONTAP 7-Mode to its Cluster-Mode. Therefore, we had to get swing gear, then do the migration from loner gear and back onto our new gear. This was a bit difficult. It took us several months to do multiple migrations."
"I would like to see better tutorials available, beyond the basics, that cover subjects like MetroCluster and automation."
"Going forward, I would like improvement in the response latencies, capacity size, cache, and controller size."
"I need faster Fibre Channel over Ethernet. They top out at 10GBs today and I would like that to go to 40 or 100."
"Implementation needs to be improved."
"In future releases, I would like to see the ability to automatically mount SMB shares and file systems."
Hitachi VSP E Series is ranked 14th in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays with 3 reviews while NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays with 281 reviews. Hitachi VSP E Series is rated 6.4, while NetApp AFF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Hitachi VSP E Series writes "A stable NVMe storage solution that can be used for high IOPS". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". Hitachi VSP E Series is most compared with Dell PowerStore and Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, whereas NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, Pure Storage FlashArray and VMware vSAN. See our Hitachi VSP E Series vs. NetApp AFF report.
See our list of best NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays vendors.
We monitor all NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays 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.
