We performed a comparison between HPE 3PAR StoreServ and NetApp AFF 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 most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"The latency is good."
"The high availability of the product is the most valuable feature."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"The initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward."
"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 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."
"The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes."
"We can do more, faster, whether it's spinning up more virtual machines or handling large amounts of data."
"This solution has given us improved application uptime and performance."
"HPE can login, fix things, alert us to things, and upgrade. We are there and aware, but we do not do the work. So, that is good."
"Valuable features include the intuitiveness of the SAN itself, a lot of the built-in logic and functionality, the tiering that it uses to determine what type of disk is best for the various types of workloads, and the automation that is built in. It's also easy to manage."
"It is easy to manage and performs very well."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ has a good interface, it is user-friendly and easy to use."
"It's advantageous in terms of the cost, in terms of the performance, and taking up less space."
"We went to an Active-Active data center, set it up to where both data centers are separate, but they act as one. We can have workloads at either side at any given time, and it is all based on the Peer Persistence architecture."
"AFF has improved my organization because we now have better performance. We can scale up and we can create servers a lot faster now. With the storage that we had, it used to take a lot longer, but now we can provide the business what they need a lot faster."
"The newest version of ONTAP has a bit of a learning curve because you need to learn where things are to find them. It is not impossible, but when you are accustomed to the older version of ONTAP, it just takes a bit getting used to it, but it is about the same as before."
"Efficient and easily scalable all-flash storage solution, significantly reducing latency, optimizing data management, and providing cost savings for businesses"
"It impacts customer retention because of its overall ease. When you are running a business, where time is a factor, that is the biggest selling point. Things happen really rapidly, when they happen, and being able to say, "Yeah, we can get this up and running in a day, if you want," or even less time in some cases. Sometimes, that can be what makes or breaks our case."
"Its consistent stability is one of the things that I like, and the performance is also very good."
"Setup was simple and easy."
"It is a stable solution."
"The Snapshot, SnapMirror, and SnapRestore functionalities."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"We would like to see VNC integration or be able to use Pure Storage with VNC."
"I'd like to see the product implement active replication for vehicles such as VMware."
"Efficiency improvements would always be welcome, but I'm not sure if they could get more efficient."
"Right now, the box itself is just strictly working as a backend storage system. It would be fantastic if we could access it directly like a NAS device through network access or SIS drives. I think they have an interface, but I am not sure how good it is. If we could address a box directly on the network without having to go through a server, it would be great. The replication schemas could be improved. We are not using replication on the storage level right now. We use a different type of replication. If their replication would be as good as the one that we have, I would probably run the replication schema because it might be faster, but I don't know that for a fact. So, I cannot say that they have good replication. All I can say is that they need to inform us better."
"It's more multi-tenant functionality in their Pure1 manage portal that is lacking."
"It is on the expensive side."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ could have better integration into the cloud and converged infrastructure."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ's pricing could be cheaper."
"The management console could use some work. All the functionality is there, of course, but it can be hard to find some features or do certain tasks."
"Sometimes the required upgrades have been a little bit involved: "You have to do this before you do this," and I want them to explain to me why. It's more work than it should be."
"I would like them to improve it so I can do firmware upgrades without downtime."
"The solution could improve by being able to handle larger data."
"The Unified Multiprotocol Access to the storage array needs to be improved."
"With 3PAR, there is remote copy software which isn't very good."
"The graphical interface is still heavy and slow. Needs more improvement in this area."
"In terms of what needs improvement, I would like to see more consistency with the UI. It seems to change every few versions. The menus can be in a completely different place."
"The quality of technical support has dwindled over time and needs to be improved."
"Its technical support could be better."
"We have had issues with CIFS presentations and outages, so if that was removed, we could do seamless upgrades without affecting CIFS presentations. That would be an advantage. That's about the only improvement I can think of."
"A while ago, they performed quite slowly."
"After the three-year prepay, the extended warranty is a little expensive."
"The scaling needs improvement. NetApp is limited for scaling options."
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 9th in All-Flash Storage with 299 reviews while NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in All-Flash Storage with 280 reviews. HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.6, while NetApp AFF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of HPE 3PAR StoreServ writes "The product's technical support is outstanding as I can reach someone right away". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". HPE 3PAR StoreServ is most compared with HPE Primera, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, HPE StorageWorks MSA and Dell PowerStore, whereas NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, Pure Storage FlashArray and VMware vSAN. See our HPE 3PAR StoreServ vs. NetApp AFF 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.
From what I understand of Gary’s response, can we assume that the HP 3PAR is more suitable for multi-site companies that require replication between sites, and that the Netapp is more suitable for local installations and is probably faster in terms of local backup and restore operations?
Either will after the maintenance period expires. They both offer 3,4 or 5 years upfront for maintenance and support. After that they will sting you big time for renewals.
If you have a lifecycle of say 4 years then get it upfront as there won't be any new charges due to replacements. Software wise is usually around 20% of the rrp price for annual renewal after the initial period of 3,4 or 5. Depends on the vendor.
The other part is how much your data is likely to grow as dedupe appliances such as store once and dell will charge a lot for upgrades. Again it's better to get more at the start to make sure your covered for the time frames you need.
Hope that all makes sense
Thanks you for your advise mate, any way let me know one things which one will give me the iceberg cost at the end of the day...? 3par with storeonce and switch or Netapp with additional third party storage back up let say from Dell server as storage to backup my data, app etc.
iIsee a lot of good comments on features of both Netapp and HP3Par, one important point to consider is that both these solutions offer some sort of point in time snapshots, snapvault,... these do not offer any cataloging features, A good backup solution includes a data base of backups for history. This is why you should also add either Data Protector, VEEM, Catalogic,. CommVault.,... the arrays themselves will do great snapshot recovery but without any information on the backups, the solution would be very limited.
Oh god I wondered when pure would raise its hand here. Seems to happen on every all flash post like they are desperate to sell systems.
I wouldn't touch pure they are struggling with sales against HP and EMC with xtremeIO systems. At a guess I would say they will get bought out soon by someone like Lenovo or another storage vendor.
However the topic here is HP vs NetApp and what's needed i would recommend staying on subject and not trying to promote other systems that haven't been asked about.
I would back the HP system here with data protector for backup. NetApp as someone else mentioned has big issues with their all flash hence why they bought an all flash competitor solid fire so that they have a proper all flash offering without WAFL
Hello, i am not familiar with 3Par storage but i can tell you great things about the PureStorage all-flash-arrays. We installed the FA-450 and an M50 and the performance is unbelievable!! Both pump through 200,000 32K IOPS. All redundant hardware and fantastic customer service.
Will there be any offsite replication ?
So if I understand what you're asking, you want to know if there is any
kind of premium to being able to back up the 3par array? The answer is no,
but there is software specifically available to do snapshots (Virtual Copy)
and for special direct-to-disk backup from a 3par to an HP StoreOnce
de-duplication appliance from Oracle or SQL Server. Feel free to call me if
you need further explanation.