We performed a comparison between NetApp AFF and Pure Storage FlashBlade based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two All-Flash Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It gives us capacity planning."
"Having an intuitive user interface to get things running is great."
"It simplifies storage."
"My rating of Pure Storage is a ten out of ten because of the price for performance and footprint - the overall value."
"It helps to simplify storage. For most of our customers, when they move to Pure Storage, storage becomes an afterthought."
"The scalability options are very nice because you can scale it much better and faster. The scalability was there in the previous environment also, but this is far better than what we had before. It basically helps the user in case they are looking for more storage. We can scale it much faster."
"We like the speed. It's very low latency. In virtualization, you can mask lots of problems, and even in code you can mask lots of problems, with low latency. It's just pure speed and low latency."
"It has improved my organization because now have lower latency, we get fewer complaints from customers, and we see a constant response time."
"We recently started using the volume encryption feature, which is helpful because there are some federal projects that require data at rest to be encrypted."
"Its top-tier performance ranks as the most valuable aspect."
"There are many reports accessing the applications. We receive them very quickly. We used to wait a long time for them. Now, you just need to wait a moment."
"I like the ability to snapshot, and the cloning features are valuable to us as well. I like that I can quickly and efficiently snapshot the data and move it to wherever I need to locally or in the cloud. Also, I know that when I take the snapshot that all of the data will be there and that it will be usable when I need to use it."
"The ease of use, the SnapMirror capabilities, the cloning, and the efficiencies are all good features."
"The most valuable feature of NetApp AFF is the reputation of the company."
"One of the main features that we love about the system is the ability to create snapshots. NetApp makes a lot of snapshots in a short space of time. Also, the speed of data recovery with NetApp, at the time we need it, is an important feature that we love."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is data protection and snapshot technology for backup."
"The solution is able to handle workloads and is easy to use. It allows us to actually manage the boxes in less time."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and simple."
"The most valuable features include the ease of implementation, ease of use and the speed that you can do backup and recovery on."
"What I like best about Pure Storage FlashBlade is its object storage functionality, plus it has fast underlying hardware. Pure Storage FlashBlade is also very stable. I find its stability one of its valuable features."
"The tool's most valuable features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the rewrite speed and the nonstop services."
"It helps simplify our storage, because the user interface is very simple and the installation is easy."
"The initial setup is pretty quick."
"Most of our upgrades have not been as smooth as they should have been."
"I think replication is one area that still needs improvement. Earlier, Pure Storage FlashArray only had IP-based replication. There was no API-based replication, but they have enhanced the feature now. However, they need to work on API replication for C-type of arrays."
"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."
"From a scalability perspective, it is a very small storage solution, so it's not very expandable."
"Pure Storage FlashArray could improve the recent file storage capabilities because it is lacking a lot of features."
"This product has only two active controllers, whereas other solutions can have more. This is something that needs to improve."
"It would be nice if Pure had something in its portfolio that provided higher deduplication and compression for backups."
"It is not possible to create a cluster on top of multiple arrays."
"Going forward, I would like improvement in the response latencies, capacity size, cache, and controller size."
"I would like to see better tutorials available, beyond the basics, that cover subjects like MetroCluster and automation."
"There are no pNFS with VMware VVOLs."
"The response to basic problems could be faster. They usually respond fast when there are critical issues, but you always want it right now."
"Its technical support could be better."
"It would be helpful if the compatibility matrix was a bit better."
"I really don't have anything to ask for in this regard, because we're not really pushing the envelope on any of our use cases. NetApp is really staying out ahead of all of our needs. I believe that there were firmware issues. I think it was just a mismatch of things that were going on. It could have possibly been something in the deployment process that wasn't done exactly right."
"The initial setup has a lot more steps in it than are probably necessary for a base deployment, unlike other vendors where it's more straightforward. It could be a little bit more streamlined."
"I would like to see the licensing fees improved as well as the price per terabytes."
"It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release."
"I would like to see more monitoring capability included in the next release of this solution."
"The solution is expensive."
"The technical support needs to improve. When we open a case, it is auto assigned to a support tech person. Nine out of ten times, we get an email right back saying that person is off until tomorrow. I cannot handle that. They just did this over the weekend to us, too. I had to call our rep and have them do something about it."
"I would like to see more deduplication."
"Pure Storage FlashBlade should improve on more cloud integration."
"Commvault has mainly driven the Analytics, providing data and reports. However, the product has room for improvement, especially regarding storage analytics. Upgrading firmware has caused issues, requiring feature disabling to revert to traditional backups. The firmware upgrades sometimes affect Commvault backups."
NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in All-Flash Storage with 280 reviews while Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 16th in All-Flash Storage with 31 reviews. NetApp AFF is rated 9.0, while Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "A high-performing and scalable solution that improves data performance for S3 workloads". NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, VMware vSAN and NetApp FAS Series, whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, MinIO, Red Hat Ceph Storage and Qumulo. See our NetApp AFF vs. Pure Storage FlashBlade 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.