We performed a comparison between Arcserve UDP and Dell Avamar based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It allows us to back up all the servers and centrally manage them."
"It is very stable."
"The ROI is very good because of the speed of the backup."
"The most valuable feature of Arcserve UDP is live replication."
"Easy restoration and the solution works quickly."
"The ease of use is the best feature of the product."
"The data protection functionality is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"It is a very stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"Effective in protecting the virtualization system and end points."
"The most valuable features are scalability and integration."
"I have found the product to be scalable."
"The product is very powerful and offers very good performance."
"We used Dell Avamar for backup and recovery of a virtual environment."
"We love the instant recovery functionality. It's very useful."
"All the features in the system are highly valuable."
"The product has a proven track record of good backups without much of a failure ratio. It also has a good backup in terms of the compression ratio."
"Arcserve UDP is in the middle range of complexity. The interface can be developed a little bit more to be user-friendly."
"I don't know whether the tool has VMware integrations. It would be good to cover this area if it doesn't have those."
"The solution could improve by being more user-friendly. It can be difficult to assign destinations and choose which files and folders we need to back up. There are some aspects that are unclear."
"The time to backup servers that sit in DMZ must be improved."
"The solution can use a lot of bandwidth when the scheduling is not done, it should auto-schedule itself. For example, if there are 50 users connected in the network at 12 o'clock and the backup is not scheduled. At this time the network offices are going to have performance issues when it is doing a backup. Having a feature to auto-schedule a time when the network is not being used often would be beneficial."
"Based on my experience, whenever we need support, there are difficulties with communication when trying to resolve the issue."
"The solution can improve by allowing older versions to support the latest version of the OS."
"The product is not user-friendly."
"When you get down to doing certain things, such as somebody wants a particular file restored, the process by which you do that is stupid. You kind of have to know exactly where to look for in order to find it. Even on older backup products that I've used, I didn't have that kind of problem. If we were looking for a file with a particular kind of a name, the solution would find that file anywhere irrespective of where it resides within the backup system. So, we didn't have to know the name of the specific server, the specific timeframe, almost all the characters of the file name, and all kinds of data in order to find a file. In Avamar, we got to know these details. We've gone around and around with them on that, and their attitude seems to be that it is working just fine. There is nothing for them to improve. The organizational system of other products that I'm working with, such as Zerto and Cohesity, seems to be centered around the tasks that you would most commonly do and want to do, as opposed to we've laid it out in a really neat technical hierarchy."
"The solution is not very strong on the Cloud. They should work out how they can use this as a backup as a service."
"If you don't have DPA, the reporting features are not as user-friendly, so reporting is something that they can improve on."
"The configuration and expansion aspects of the solution need improvement. They're complicated and don't really integrate well."
"In my opinion, the user interface and the user friendliness could be improved. The specific thing I have in mind are the graphics, which are not quite user-friendly."
"It lacks support for certain plugins, like SAP HANA, for example."
"I have found the support from Dell EMC Avamar to be not as good as Veeam. The time it takes to receive support could be improved. However, once we have the support the agents are knowledgeable and helpful."
"Compared with Cohesity or Rubrik, which have some continuous data protection for backup and replication, this solution tends to lack in this area."
Arcserve UDP is ranked 18th in Backup and Recovery with 41 reviews while Dell Avamar is ranked 12th in Backup and Recovery with 81 reviews. Arcserve UDP is rated 7.6, while Dell Avamar is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Arcserve UDP writes "Global deduplication, stable, and flexible licensing options". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Dell Avamar writes "Stable, integrates well with other solutions, and has a good price, but its UI needs a refresh". Arcserve UDP is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Acronis Cyber Protect, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), Veritas Backup Exec and Rubrik, whereas Dell Avamar is most compared with Dell PowerProtect Data Manager, Veeam Backup & Replication, Dell NetWorker, Dell PowerProtect DP (IDPA) and Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain). See our Arcserve UDP vs. Dell Avamar report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery 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.
