We performed a comparison between Pure Storage FlashBlade and VAST Data 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."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."
"The duplication algorithm allows us to get a lot more use out of less storage. We're running a five terabyte array right now and we're running probably about 30 terabytes on it. So the duplication rate is pretty phenomenal, without a cost to performance. It still runs pretty smoothly."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reliability."
"What I really like about this program, is that it is easy to use and easy to configurate."
"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."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe has low latency and high Ops. It is an evergreen model."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the rewrite speed and the nonstop services."
"The most valuable features include the ease of implementation, ease of use and the speed that you can do backup and recovery on."
"Using this solution has made our backups more reliable."
"We can capacity plan at a greater level than we used to."
"The snapshots, replication, and the ability to have immutable blades are the most valuable features. You're putting data snapshots out in those blades, and they cannot be touched. Its performance is great."
"The initial setup is pretty quick."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and simple."
"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."
"This has been one of the most reliable storage systems that I have ever used."
"The solution is useful for machine learning and scientific applications, including computer simulations."
"There is room for improvement in catering to midrange storage needs, especially for customers seeking Enterprise-class features."
"We need better data deduplication."
"In the future, I would like to see integration with enterprise backup systems."
"We would like to see VNC integration or be able to use Pure Storage with VNC."
"The software layer has to improve."
"We would like to see more visibility into garbage collection and CPU performance in the GUI."
"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."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"On our dedupe during our initial buy, we were expecting a number a little higher like 4x. However, we are getting about 3.6. While it is close enough, it doesn't quite hit the numbers. So, this has been a challenge."
"It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release."
"I want efficiency. FlashBlade doesn't have efficiency now."
"The solution is expensive."
"The features provided for SMB customers are limited."
"Pure Storage FlashBlade should improve on more cloud integration."
"In terms of scalability, it doesn't expand out quite as robustly as some of the others, but it covers 90% of the market in what it does."
"The speed could be improved."
"The write performance could be improved because it is less than half of the read performance."
"The read/write ratio is an area in the solution with some flaws and needs improvement."
Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 21st in All-Flash Storage with 31 reviews while VAST Data is ranked 17th in All-Flash Storage with 2 reviews. Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8, while VAST Data is rated 10.0. The top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "A high-performing and scalable solution that improves data performance for S3 workloads". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VAST Data writes "Stability-wise, a device that has been up and running for years". Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), MinIO, Pure Storage FlashArray, Red Hat Ceph Storage and Dell ECS, whereas VAST Data is most compared with NetApp AFF, Pure Storage FlashArray, Qumulo, Dell PowerScale (Isilon) and DDN SFA7990X. See our Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. VAST Data report.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors and best File and Object 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.
