Most Helpful Review
Researched Dell EMC XtremIO Flash but chose Pure Storage FlashArray: Enables us to deploy a 3:1 ratio for storage and has good deduplication and compression
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell EMC XtremIO Flash vs. Pure Storage FlashArray and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
391,122 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
We mostly use it for backup, because we cannot measure anything, and we are afraid to use it for surveillance systems. We were planning to use it for mostly for surveillance systems.
The most valuable features are that it is fast and reliable.
We've seen great enhancements from the performance point of view. There's good availability, stability, and continuity, but the performance actually has increased by 60 or 70%.
I like the deduplication and auto-tiering features.
The solution's most valuable feature is its high performance.
The solution's most valuable features are the inline data reduction and deduplication.
The program is very stable.
The most valuable features are: complete performance and ease of use.
We also use VMware integrations developed by Pure, their plugins in our vCenter environment. They help by allowing our non-technical operations teams to deploy new data stores and resize data stores without me having to involve myself all the time to do those simple tasks.
Their REST API is wonderful, well-documented, and easy to use.
As soon as we introduced our first Pure Storage FlashArray, the first benefit was at least twice the performance increase. Our production databases simply ran twice as fast with no other change.
Pure Storage technology allowed us to automate tasks, reducing something which started as a 12-hour turnaround down to about 15 minutes.
The data reduction technology part of the scalability has been impressive, like its ability to host additional workloads, volumes of data, and databases.
The performance is very good.
For us, the most valuable feature is the compression and deduplication. Being able to deploy a three to one ratio for storage is absolutely critical in today's world with the growing need for storage and the growing need for more space.
The ease of management is one of the most valuable features of this solution. I would have also said that it's pretty fast but now our SQL servers are starting to beat it up pretty bad.
One thing that should be improved is the reporting and monitoring tools. It should use real time monitoring for storage, IOPS, latency, etc.
The management should be improved and the GUI interface could be better and easier.
The solution needs to be simplified. When you integrate your storage with other systems, could use a little bit of automation.
The product could be improved by reducing the pricing and having better organization in their technical support team.
The implementation isn't exactly complex, but the solution should have some enhancements in it to make the process more centralized.
This solution is geared toward enterprise-level companies. Small and medium-sized businesses would find it extremely expensive.
I would like to see more scalability.
It is very expensive to scale. You have to buy an additional system to extend from one disc, for instance. It is scalable, but extremely expensive to do so.
If they could make it cheaper, that would be something.
The higher education moves slowly. We are still looking forward to implementing the full list of existing features.
In terms of the future, I have been excited by some of the copy data management stuff that they're talking about building into the environment. There are feature sets where I've done a lot of automation work. So, I am always looking forward to extensions of their API. They're also talking about a phone home centralized analytics database being used as a centralized management console with a list of new cloud features, but this doesn't seem finalized.
Storage. There could be better storage.
The scalability of the solution is not as good as it probably could be.
A year ago they promised that they would be able to read through the database encryption with more metric and they have not delivered on that patch, which is significant because it gives us back so much more storage room. We want to be able to read through the encryption.
We would like to see better troubleshooting aspects. It helps us if we can find out where the problem is. Right now, it's difficult. Sometimes it's difficult to pinpoint the issue. If they had more visibility and more troubleshooting feature built into the tool that would really help.
In the next release of this solution, we would like to see automated copy data management for SQL Server.
Pricing and Cost Advice
The initial purchase price was good but when you need to upgrade, it's a different story.
There are costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.
It is expensive if you need to increase scalability.
In terms of other contemporary arrays, Pure is something you need to have a use case for, as it's not priced for you to buy one off-the-shelf. If you have a use case, heavy lift Oracle Databases, any type of noticeable virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI), or need low latency and high throughput, you should consider all-flash at least and probably Pure Storage.
I don't know the exact cost but it's around $1,000.
Pure has been flexible with us on the pricing models.
We have 16 or 18 arrays. We like to do the three-year support model so that we get Evergreen and therefore, we get free upgrades. We pay around more than 1.5 million dollars.
Our costs are around $100,000.
I have had a couple of customers who have complained about the cost. It can be a little more expensive than some of the other platforms. After it has been installed, I have never had a customer say, "I wish we wouldn't have spent all that extra money." They have always been happy with the product after it has been installed. They might be on the fence about it because of the price, but everybody who I have ever seen install it, they are always happy with it.
We evaluated Oracle and Hitachi, but Pure Storage had the better pricing.
The cost has room for improvement.
out of 33 in All-Flash Storage Arrays
Average Words per Review
out of 33 in All-Flash Storage Arrays
Average Words per Review
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 20% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 18% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
|Dell EMC||Pure Storage|
|Bring all-flash, scale-out storage to your enterprise applications with EMC XtremIO. Purpose-built for flash, XtremIO storage arrays are amazingly fast. Delivering high IOPS at less than 1 millisecond latency is just the start. EMC XtremIO helps you harness the power of flash storage by building in innovations like content-based data placement and dual-stage metadata.|
Pure Storage FlashArray is the world’s first enterprise-class, all-NVMe flash storage array. It represents a new class of storage – shared accelerated storage, that delivers major breakthroughs in performance, simplicity, and consolidation. Pure Storage is fresh and modern today and will be for the next decade. Without forklift upgrades or planned downtime, Pure takes the work out of storage ownership and delivers unprecedented customer satisfaction.
Learn more about Dell EMC XtremIO Flash
Learn more about Pure Storage FlashArray
|Raiffeisen Bank Bulgaria, Wentworth-Douglas Hospital||Nielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas|
Financial Services Firm30%
Software R&D Company16%
Comms Service Provider11%
Financial Services Firm8%
Financial Services Firm20%
Software R&D Company27%
Comms Service Provider10%
Financial Services Firm9%