We compared NetApp FAS Series and Dell PowerScale (Isilon) based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, the NetApp FAS Series is praised for its advanced data management and storage capabilities, seamless integration, exceptional customer service, positive ROI, but may need enhancements in performance and user interface. On the other hand, Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is lauded for its scalability, efficient storage management, exceptional customer service, positive ROI, but could benefit from improvements in interface, performance speed, scalability, compatibility, and technical support.
Features: NetApp FAS Series stands out for its efficient data management and storage, seamless integration with third-party software, advanced data protection and backup capabilities, as well as its high performance and reliability. In contrast, Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is praised for its exceptional data scalability, efficient storage management, and reliable performance.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for NetApp FAS Series is considered reasonable and affordable according to user feedback. Users appreciate the transparency and ease of understanding in terms of pricing, setup, and licensing. On the other hand, Dell PowerScale (Isilon) also offers a straightforward setup cost without any hidden charges or complexities. The pricing of Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is seen as competitive in the market, and the licensing process is described as seamless and efficient., The NetApp FAS Series product has been highly praised for its cost-effectiveness, efficiency, performance, reliability, and seamless integration capabilities. Users have experienced increased productivity and reduced downtime. On the other hand, Dell PowerScale (Isilon) has been commended for its performance, scalability, efficiency, and ability to handle large data workloads. Users have also reported cost savings and improved productivity. Overall, both products have delivered significant value and proved to be worthwhile investments.
Room for Improvement: The differences between NetApp FAS Series and Dell PowerScale (Isilon) products lie in various areas. NetApp FAS Series would benefit from improvements in performance, networking capabilities, and user interface. On the other hand, Dell PowerScale (Isilon) requires enhancements in its interface, performance speed, scalability, compatibility with other systems, and technical support.
Deployment and customer support: The reviews comparing NetApp FAS Series and Dell PowerScale (Isilon) suggest that users reported varying timeframes for establishing the tech solutions. Some users mentioned spending three months on deployment for NetApp FAS Series, while others reported a week for setup for Dell PowerScale. It is important to consider these differences when evaluating the overall duration of implementation., The customer service for NetApp FAS Series is highly praised for its reliability, responsiveness, and efficiency. Users appreciate the prompt resolution of queries and professionalism exhibited by the support staff. On the other hand, Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is commended for its exceptional customer service, particularly in terms of promptness, effectiveness, and willingness to address issues. Users are impressed with the level of expertise and professionalism demonstrated by Dell's support team.
The summary above is based on 44 interviews we conducted recently with NetApp FAS Series and Dell PowerScale (Isilon) users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Our users are able to easily roll back snapshots without going through IT."
"Isilon is flexible in supporting various data workloads while keeping them protected. Dell continues to release updates and patches which enhance the use of this solution. This includes offering ransomware protection."
"Dell PowerScale is a scalable solution. It allows non-disruptive upgrades and maintenance of the system."
"Its scalability has been huge for us."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable feature of Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is all the capabilities together."
"The single pane of glass for both IT and for the end-user is a valuable feature. On the IT side, I can actually control where things are stored, whether something is stored on solid-state drives or spinning drives... The single pane of glass makes it very easy to use and very easy to understand. We started at 100 terabytes and we moved to 250 and it still feels like the exact same system and we're able to move data as needed."
"Dell PowerScale's performance is good."
"It is a scalable solution."
"It has integrated snapshot and backup capability."
"The product is user-friendly and helps to evaluate the performance of each node. It ensures that if one node encounters an issue, the system can immediately redistribute the workload without interruptions. This setup provides uninterrupted operation for our systems."
"Has rock solid reliability and is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature for us is the combining of HA and SnapMirror."
"The migration of the volume on the cluster is very useful and easy to use."
"I like the unified management feature because sometimes you end up running a single protocol on the entire system."
"The file sharing feature is most valuable."
"Data storage performance needs to be improved."
"Dell PowerScale needs to reduce its price."
"Because of the magic that it does 'under the hood,' it is very difficult to find out within the system where all your storage is going. That's a little bit of a ding that we have on it. It does so much magic in order to protect itself from drive failures or multiple drive failures, that it automatically handles the provisioning and storage of your data. But by doing that, finding out why a file of a certain size, or a directory of a certain size, is using more storage than is being reported in InsightIQ, is very difficult to discern."
"The cost of Dell PowerScale is currently high and there is room for improvement."
"The product’s expansion capacity, pricing clarity, and ease of use need improvement."
"There aren't many templates still coming out for it. They need to provide templates so we can copy and paste what we've done in the past to future, new things."
"There is room for improvement in its handling of object storage."
"Additional metadata reporting would be great. We have to use a separate tool to report on that. We would like to view the age of data and how long it has been since someone has accessed a file."
"As I see it, there could be more interfaces, more cache, etc."
"It could be more flexible in terms of configuration."
"It may need more flexibility to fight with other competing arrays."
"The biggest issue we face is parts delivery. There's no local warehouse in Myanmar, so if a customer encounters a technical problem like an IMEI issue, they have to wait a long time for replacement parts."
"The WAFL is slow."
"There are some technical limitations, but it would be great to have in-line deduplication and in-line compression for the FAS series as well."
"The one aspect of the solution that's negative for us is also more unique to us due to the fact that we did a MetroCluster. The tiebreaker piece that does the monitoring of the two different locations, and determines if one is not talking to the network normally (or if it's truly down) is a little difficult. It feels like it was not designed from the beginning to fit well into the other pieces. It feels like it was thrown in at the last minute and it is not smooth."
"The solution can improve on the replication features."
Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is ranked 1st in NAS with 37 reviews while NetApp FAS Series is ranked 2nd in NAS with 98 reviews. Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is rated 9.0, while NetApp FAS Series is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Dell PowerScale (Isilon) writes "We can easily deploy, manage, and maintain systems without needing a huge amount of expertise to facilitate them". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp FAS Series writes "Offers good performance and ". Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is most compared with Dell ECS, Pure Storage FlashBlade, Qumulo, HPE StoreEasy and Red Hat Ceph Storage, whereas NetApp FAS Series is most compared with NetApp AFF, HPE StorageWorks MSA, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), IBM FlashSystem and HPE StoreEasy. See our Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs. NetApp FAS Series report.
See our list of best NAS vendors.
We monitor all NAS 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.
Isilon is Scale-out storage, while NetApp is Active-Standby storage.
Regarding the performance issue based on the field engineer’s experience, Isilon is better than NetApp in case of a huge amount of io, while NetApp is better than Isilon in case of a medium amount of IO.
I think you need rewiew more than only performance or capacity, I have installed both machines, Netapp FASS have many options Hibrid or only objects, in Netapp Objects is StorageGrid where can obtain 720 TB in SG5760 but you can select SG6060 or SG5712 and Isilon is similar you have many options where could be ALL FLASH or SATA but Isilon is only NAS, and Isilon have many reference too, 8 reference F810 have 924 TB and up 250.000 I/Ops.
Actually I recommend one arquitecture where no focus only in one purpose, Scale up or Scale out all vendors have different alternatives and deppend the machine offer more I/O or Capacity, Midrange and High end, I don´t like Isilon because is only for NAS I dont like Hibrid or Unified Machines as FAS or VNX, I need to know which is the prupose for have a NAS because actually I can have a Storage for all protocols no only to CIFS and NFS and with prices cheaper than NAS, in conclusion I don´t like one Storage for NAS other for SAN other for Virtualization... Is better only one Storage where I can do it all, It reduce TCO.