We performed a comparison between HPE StoreEasy and IBM FlashSystem 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."The most valuable feature of HPE StoreEasy is the storing of virtual machines."
"I like the user quotas, integrations, and separations for storage."
"The solution's most valuable feature is the duplication."
"This solution allows me to better and more easily manage user data without impacting my primary storage."
"I can use both the on-premises and cloud storage options. I need to have an APR extension from StoreEasy, and it's that simple."
"I like the tool's provisioning feature and OneView."
"The most valuable features were the performance of the array, i.e., very low latency and high IOPS. Plus, the management interface is very easy to use."
"The performance of the All-Flash System is very good. There is more enhanced performance and data production in the solution, which I appreciate."
"The most valuable feature in demand is virtualization and its support storage of virtualization features."
"The speed of the unit is its best feature. It performs very well."
"It's a mature product. It's like a BMW that evolves consistently."
"The most valuable features of IBM FlashSystem are performance and security."
"This solution is really user friendly. It also offers good performance and is highly reliable."
"It's very easy to manage."
"When I configure the StoreEasy in a complex environment I have problems finding compatibility with all the software."
"I would like to improve the tool's technical support. I would also like to see the product's hybrid cloud version."
"We need some monitoring tools and it would be helpful if they were included."
"The support of HPE StoreEasy can improve its responsiveness. Dell support is better."
"It would be better if it were more scalable. In the next release, I would like to access some Microsoft Windows storage server features. I guess the newest version of Windows Server has some restrictions."
"The cluster service is not available in the latest version of HPE StoreEasy."
"Our customers have raised concerns about the limitations of the FlashSystem 5200 and 7300, which only offer a 32-gigabyte connection."
"A big area for improvement is that the data reduction pool feature is not recommended for use in a production environment because it has stability and performance issues."
"One area for improvement is in the GUI, where host clusters are not properly dealt with. With Hypervisor host clusters, all hosts must see the same volumes in the same order. Using the concept of a “host-group” has been around (even with IBM) for many years, so why not with the V7000?"
"I think the only thing the developers can look at, is that it is limited to 25 gigabytes currently. In the next release they might want to increase that."
"Events/log analysis tools."
"Our model does not support compression or deduplication."
"The design is a little old-fashioned and could be updated. The rack is very primitive and designed in an older style."
"The product needs to improve their scalability."
HPE StoreEasy is ranked 8th in NAS with 7 reviews while IBM FlashSystem is ranked 5th in NAS with 106 reviews. HPE StoreEasy is rated 8.2, while IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of HPE StoreEasy writes "Good backup solution for applications that is also scalable and stable ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". HPE StoreEasy is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), NetApp FAS Series, Qumulo, FreeNAS and HPE 3PAR StoreServ, whereas IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, Dell Unity XT and NetApp AFF. See our HPE StoreEasy vs. IBM FlashSystem report.
See our list of best NAS 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.
