We performed a comparison between Pure Storage FlashArray and Pure FlashArray X NVMe based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Pure FlashArray X NVMe came out ahead of Pure Storage FlashArray. Although the two products are easy to deploy, have quality support, and have a good ROI, Pure Storage FlashArray is more expensive.
"It has good, reliable, fast storage."
"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."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use."
"The high availability of the product is the most valuable feature."
"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."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe has low latency and high Ops. It is an evergreen model."
"The initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward."
"The latency is good."
"The most valuable features are extremely low latency, high IOPS with VMware, inline deduplication and compression."
"Scalability is one of the best features. You can quickly add more. You can swap out the drives with larger sizes, you can add more shelves. All of that is perfect - the whole concept of keeping it modular..."
"Pure Storage technology allowed us to automate tasks, reducing something which started as a 12-hour turnaround down to about 15 minutes."
"The first year, we started out with one or five terabytes and it took what was 20 terabytes of storage down to less than one terabyte."
"It is always out of the box, and ready to use."
"It's extremely stable and has good performance."
"Pure gives us better compression, it's easier to manage, a lot less hands-on."
"It is an easy to use product for all of my team members."
"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."
"We would like to see VNC integration or be able to use Pure Storage with VNC."
"It's more multi-tenant functionality in their Pure1 manage portal that is lacking."
"Our use cases require more multi-tenant capabilities and additional VLAN interfaces for separating different customers. We currently use it to provide storage, sometimes shared storage, to different customers, but it is less flexible in comparison to a dedicated solution."
"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."
"Every time I think of something that needs to improve, they're one step ahead, which I love. The only area I wish to see improve, I believe is coming, is in the FlashBlade product. Blade implementation fell short on a few of the services."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"Its price needs improvement. Its price is almost double than any other flash storage solution."
"We would like to integrate it more with our backup solutions."
"FlashArray's capacity for forecasting should be improved because it needs to be a bit more current. I think it's bundled with the deduplication and other compression factors. We need more user interfaces for forecasting in this software and more interfaces need to be integrated with this array management tool."
"The product should improve its response time. I have also encountered issues with its configuration."
"It would be nice if Pure had something in its portfolio that provided higher deduplication and compression for backups."
"I had to contact customer support when a drive failed as I was doing a couple of OS upgrades."
"The technical support is okay, but could be improved."
"We would like to see more development on their Copy Automation Tool (CAT) for Oracle, as well as better integration for our customers running Oracle VM."
Pure FlashArray X NVMe is ranked 14th in All-Flash Storage with 28 reviews while Pure Storage FlashArray is ranked 3rd in All-Flash Storage with 174 reviews. Pure FlashArray X NVMe is rated 9.2, while Pure Storage FlashArray is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Pure FlashArray X NVMe writes "Reasonably priced, scales well, and offers good stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashArray writes "Effective provisioning, helpful support, and reliable". Pure FlashArray X NVMe is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Dell PowerMax NVMe, whereas Pure Storage FlashArray is most compared with Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, HPE Nimble Storage, IBM FlashSystem and VMware vSAN. See our Pure FlashArray X NVMe vs. Pure Storage FlashArray 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.