We performed a comparison between DDN IntelliFlash and NetApp AFF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage."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..."
"All updates, upgrades, and hardware work are all performed on-line with no impact."
"The solution offers amazing performance."
"The management features are well organized and they have a very good dashboard."
"We find the ease of usability and setup valuable."
"It has been very stable. I have not seen or heard of downtime storage issues after moving over to it."
"Having an intuitive user interface to get things running is great."
"The stability of Pure Storage is very very good."
"EasyTier/hotcaching: Valuable because it allows greater performance than standard SAS disks"
"It's very fast. We were seeing read latencies of less than one millisecond. It is robust."
"Data Compression: Up to 80% space reduction in the database"
"It performed great originally, and when it performed great, it was awesome."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"It provides a combination of all the protocols that you need, without losing deduplication and compression."
"It has reduced our electricity usage by reducing the amount of disks needed for the virtual environment."
"High performance and ease-of-management are the most valuable features."
"I think that the DR applications are the most valuable, including Snapshots and SnapMirror."
"The technical support is fantastic. No one else is like their team. We're happy with them."
"The most valuable features are the ease of administration and configuration, as well as the speed of deployment."
"The most valuable features are deduplication and compression, so we get more out of our storage. The replication is also important."
"Performance. Mostly with our default settings it's good. All of the factory settings are fine. We don't have to tune it."
"It's very stable. It's always there when we need it. With the Dual Controller, if one drops out, the other one comes right online. We don't use any iSCSI so there is a little bit of a latency break but, over the NFS, we don't notice that switch-on. We can do maintenance in the middle of the day, literally rip a whole controller out of the chassis, and do what we need to do with it."
"It has a good interface. Its configuration and flexibility are also good."
"The NVMe flash cache is the most useful feature. It lowers transactional speed even more."
"The file functionality could be better."
"The price should be lower."
"CIFS and SMB Shares cannot be mounted directly."
"It needs to improve its price."
"I can't see where they can make anything better, unless, of course, they lower their prices even more."
"I would rate this solution an eight. To make it a ten it would have to be a little cheaper."
"I would like some performance analytics which go deeper than today. It should be specific to some hosts and applications. This would be good."
"There was some complexity in the initial setup."
"In the proxy section you can’t choose a user account and password, so it is not allowed at the moment to go out, if customer has such constellation."
"It's somewhat scalable, but maybe not so much as some of the competition."
"Snapshots are not as easy to access as on a NetApp device."
"Performance is horrible now. Our original intent was to buy new storage in about two years. But since it became a critical urgency for us, we decided to purchase a new one in two or three months."
"They need to offer better integration for a virtual platform to enable you to create hyper-converged solution."
"We had just one small stability problem with power flapping and it did not start up again automatically. We had to access service ports and manually restart the storage processors."
"Technical support is bad. It'd grade them at 30% or 40%. The response time is terrible."
"It only keeps one hour of real-time data without the ability to do deep analysis of each element."
"ZAPI is kind of difficult to use. You know, it's SOAP-like, it's not really SOAP. I would like to see it more of a REST-based JSON, instead of XML."
"We would like to have more behavioral reporting."
"We have had trouble with restoring applications, and if there is more support for application-aware backups then that would be great."
"There is no direct storage attachment available. Most configurations require additional switches for data access."
"This is an expensive solution that could be cheaper."
"I've had a few cases where support wasn't able to answer the question or they took quite a while."
"Some of the graphical user interface changes in the later versions of NetApp have not been as good as the older ones, like in the 9.5 era."
"You have a limit in terms of how much you can expand storage. It sounds like a lot. However, over the years, as you grow, it may be smaller than you think."
Earn 20 points
DDN IntelliFlash is ranked 29th in All-Flash Storage with 11 reviews while NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in All-Flash Storage with 280 reviews. DDN IntelliFlash is rated 7.4, while NetApp AFF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of DDN IntelliFlash writes "Good features with an easy initial setup but technical support is slow ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". DDN IntelliFlash is most compared with VAST Data and Tintri VMstore, whereas NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, VMware vSAN and NetApp FAS Series.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors and best NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays 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.