We performed a comparison between Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and IBM FlashSystem based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NAS solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is test performance. It helps us store large amounts of data along with providing us faster retrieval of data."
"The ease of use. That's what our customers love. They say it's very easy, they don't need special training, they don't need to call us or any other company or integrator to help them do their job. That's the main reason they purchase Pure."
"Access speed and power consumption are most valuable."
"We've had to use tech support on a number of occasions. They did everything remotely and talked us all the way through. They fixed the issue within 30 minutes. Every single time we contact them, they're perfect. I would give their technical support a ten out of ten."
"My rating of Pure Storage is a ten out of ten because of the price for performance and footprint - the overall value."
"The technical support is very good."
"The stability and performance are the best things about the solution."
"Their support system has insight into errors on our SAN fabric that we can't see. They've brought attention to and raised awareness for us about things that we couldn't see, when we were experiencing problems."
"It's best features are its reliability and stability."
"The most valuable features in Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series are Shadowimage, easy to manage equipment, and upgrading the firewire is very simple."
"The performance was decent."
"The biggest benefit of the Hitachi platform is 100 percent storage uptime. It's also highly cost-effective."
"The deduplication is useful for us because we don't have that much money for our lab infrastructure. Deduplication means we have more storage available. And the IOPS are really fast."
"The first thing that attracted this model to us was the non-disruptive migration. We had a very large database application that was on older gear and needed to be migrated to these arrays. We had experience with virtualizing behind an array and moving applications and data but this made it even better."
"Overall, the solution is strong, easy and fast."
"I am happy about the storage system and availability."
"IBM's technical support do excellent work."
"Stability-wise, this solution is fine."
"High availability and enhanced security; Proven dependability; Data compression with hardware acceleration; Advanced copy services features are all in this product."
"The performance is very good and we use this product to enhance our core system."
"The Flash core models offer amazing performance."
"Data deduplication is one of the most valuable features of this solution."
"The most valuable feature is reliability."
"Most of the features for the reduction in data compression are useful. It is also very easy to use and administer. Its performance is also good."
"In the next release, I would like to see file-level encryption."
"We do have an issue with the vCenter integration. Pure Storage says it has a lot of free space, but vCenter says its completely full. This is because their dedupes are saved as space, but Vcenter still detects the disk as completely full. So, we do have an issue with that."
"Pure Storage will have issues with positioning in the near future since its a relatively new company. For now, customers need a PoC to trust using the solution, as it can't stand on its brand name alone. They need to improve Pure Storage's marketing."
"The scalability of the solution is not as good as it probably could be."
"I would like to get a weekly report of how our storage has been used, and if there is any storage sitting there not being used."
"If they could make it cheaper, that would be something."
"It was a little costly. The price was ultimately higher than both of the other solutions that we evaluated. I'd say that's the only downside."
"I’d love to view the average, minimum and maximum performance in the reports (Analysis tab - Performance) but it is only graphics and you need to export data in CSV to find this information."
"The installation procedure it a bit difficult, because it is a high-end solution. With this type of product, the original company is interested in doing the setup for customers in the area, but because of sanctions we were not able to get support in our area. We faced many issued trying to learn to run this product."
"At the moment, I don't see any room for improvement in Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform G Series because my experience with the product is very good. The software is okay and you can manage the storage well. What I'd like to see in the next release of Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform G Series is for it to be a real NAS solution because right now, you need to use a Hitachi converter called HNAS which makes the process a little bit more expensive. In my opinion, Hitachi should look into the possibility of unifying the HNAS into full storage, meaning that the HNAS should be integrated into the Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform G Series."
"Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform needs to improve its scalability options where there are a few shortcomings."
"The embedded management for installation feature has neither simplified nor complicated the management process, therefore, there is room for improvement."
"n future releases, I would like to see enhancements in the web GUI capabilities for direct management without additional PCM."
"They should look at the cost because there are other vendors who offer the same cost with more features."
"Hitachi should launch some small machines in Brazil. The smallest machine here in Brazil is VSP 350, which can be quite big for some of the customers. In China, Hitachi has small models of this equipment, but those models are not available in our region. Its pricing is a big issue for us. We are resellers, and we face some competition from other vendors. Hitachi doesn't always have a good position in terms of the price. Its user interface is also not as good as some of the other competitors, and it can be improved."
"I would like the fan noise to be automatically adjusted based on the drive's current workload."
"The solution is not easy to implement. It takes a lot of time to study the product and it's a little complicated in general."
"The storage capacity of this solution could be improved."
"Our customers have raised concerns about the limitations of the FlashSystem 5200 and 7300, which only offer a 32-gigabyte connection."
"We had issues when attempting to do a flash, we hope to resolve it soon."
"The product needs to improve their scalability."
"It has room for improvement in the area of stability."
"The basic setup can be challenging when it comes to certain IP addresses and the configuration of the IP. You have to go in to different menus to makes changes and ensure it is stable."
"IBM FlashSystems is lagging in optimizing storage technologies."
More Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is ranked 5th in NAS with 48 reviews while IBM FlashSystem is ranked 4th in NAS with 106 reviews. Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is rated 8.4, while IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform writes "It's a high-performing solution with strong architecture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is most compared with Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, Dell Unity XT, Huawei OceanStor Dorado and NetApp FAS Series, whereas IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, NetApp AFF, HPE Nimble Storage and Dell PowerMax NVMe. See our Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform vs. IBM FlashSystem report.
See our list of best NAS vendors, best Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) vendors, and best All-Flash Storage 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.
