We performed a comparison between Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and HPE 3PAR StoreServ 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."With Pure Storage, we don't see any latency or IOPS. It has been a very seamless integration."
"Performance, deduplication, compression, and fast response time for requests from servers and applications."
"NVMe data storage platform that's easy to set up and easy to use. It's stable, with a lower response time, and quick technical support."
"It's easy to use, and the maintenance upgrades to get free controllers work really well."
"The most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray is the all-flash storage performance, low latency, and efficiency of their de-duplication technology. Additionally, the ease of use is good compared to other storage systems. The features in data protection, snapshotting, and replication between data centers and sites are superior to other solutions."
"I never have to worry about its performance or if it is the root cause of an issue."
"The most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray is its high stability level."
"The speed is one of the most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray."
"The solution is very user-friendly in terms of maintenance and configuration. It's also possible to connect the solution to other storage management solutions."
"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 solution provides excellent scalability."
"The active-active option seemed to be working well and overall, it was a solid product."
"It's a state of the art solution in storage systems. High-availability and performance are the strongest aspects of these machines."
"This is one of the most reliable and dependable products on the market."
"Overall, the solution is strong, easy and fast."
"The most valuable feature is that it has 'eight nines' availability, 99.999999 percent of the time. That is the main selling point."
"It runs. I don't have a problem with it. If it needs an update, I can do it in the middle of the day with nobody being the wiser. It is phenomenal in that respect. As a hospital, I get two hours every quarter to reboot things, so it is imperative that nothing goes down."
"Remote-copy provides high availability and disaster recovery for the connected clients."
"It allows us to cohost as needed. We are able to put more systems on one data storage system and it is still able to deliver the availability and speed that we need it to deliver."
"We use for our tier one and two apps, so they can do failover, synchronous replication."
"We like something called Virtual Volumes and how we can do thin provisioning."
"It is very stable. That is why we bought it."
"Its stability is the most valuable. It has soft alerts. When an alert is raised, we get a call from HP saying that there is this type of alert, and they need to do a remote session to check things. Similarly, for firmware updates, they get in touch to say that a firmware upgrade is required on your storage. They schedule a time and take control remotely to upgrade the firmware. In all such cases, there is no downtime. Everything is done when a full-fledged operation is going on. Its user interface is also quite good. We are quite accustomed to this user interface. We can easily take a look at the current usage or the amount of storage. It is quite easily understandable, and I can present those things to my seniors or other people who are not that tech-savvy, and they can easily understand what we are trying to tell them. We can easily show them that we are using around 87% of the storage, so we need to plan for another tree and things like that."
"The most valuable features for me are the simple management of the platform and its performance."
"The initial setup was a little complex. We had some initial issues with the design and had to help correct some of the white papers for it, but it wasn't your standard use case."
"There was some complexity in the initial setup."
"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."
"It is not possible to create a cluster on top of multiple arrays."
"We did have one hiccup with the integration of vCenter. When we were installing Pure Storage, we were using vCenter 6.7, which defaults to the HTML5 Web Client. The current plugin for Pure Storage doesn't show up in that client at all. You have to go and use the legacy FlexFlash client to see the Pure Storage plugin in vCenter."
"The GUI could improve, it could be more intuitive. There is hidden functionality."
"I recognize it's a difficult challenge, but I would like to see them make the pricing more reasonable."
"If we suddenly dump large amounts of data onto the storage system, it takes a while to process it."
"This product should be easier to install and set up."
"It seemed like every time we turned around it was a statement of work and we'd have to pay for something that our previous vendors would not have billed us for."
"The solution is priced higher than its competitors."
"The embedded management for installation feature has neither simplified nor complicated the management process, therefore, there is room for improvement."
"The initial deployment was somewhat complex when it came to the installation because of the network connectivity. It was more difficult, in this specific case, than with other platforms."
"The snapshot and clone operation functions can be made easier."
"For the support windows to work, maybe they have to upgrade the firmware of the VSP. They changed the hardware or the disk. I don't know if it was the port blade they changed or a VM for a memory cache. Also, replacing the old target with the processor target would be fine. The old equipment is very easy to manage, and I don't have any bad commentary."
"n future releases, I would like to see enhancements in the web GUI capabilities for direct management without additional PCM."
"Sadly, the support from HPE has not been all that great. It is tough to get a tech out or get a response from some of the techs that we have."
"The replicating software is pretty complicated. I probably would have put it on a sequence."
"The speed of the hard disk could be better. The performance is the main issue for us. The performance of the VMs is not comparable to desktop machines, for instance, and we might need another solution to improve the performance. Other than that, we don't have any issues. We already have a great part of storage with SSDs, and the performance is not as good as I expected."
"We need longer names for our volumes. Now it's only 28 characters. It should be 64, or at least more than 32 characters."
"I would like to see an automatic re-balancing system or functionality for adaptive optimization."
"HPE could improve by raising awareness when a new product is launched. They must think of ways to better serve and engage with their enterprise customers. HPE is selling enterprise products and mission-critical support."
"While the stability is pretty good, it could always be improved upon."
"This solution is now at end-of-life."
More Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is ranked 5th in NAS with 48 reviews while HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 6th in NAS with 299 reviews. Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is rated 8.4, while HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.6. 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 HPE 3PAR StoreServ writes "The product's technical support is outstanding as I can reach someone right away". Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is most compared with IBM FlashSystem, Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, Dell Unity XT and Hitachi NAS Platform, whereas HPE 3PAR StoreServ is most compared with HPE Primera, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, NetApp AFF and HPE StoreOnce. See our HPE 3PAR StoreServ vs. Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform 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.
3PAR is SAS-based storage. The industry is already moving away from the 35-year-old SCSI-way, so it's not a good idea to buy any product with it.
I'm not sure about Hitachi, but as far as I know, they also have SAS backend, so, the obvious answer to the question "Which should I choose?" is "none of them".
My recommendation is - choose other vendors (or models) which provide end-to-end NVMe support and make a choice between them.
Hitachi, if cost and performance for mission-critical apps are high priority.
Otherwise, HPW 3PAR (or now HPE Primera) will be the best all-around for cost and performance. Plus, HPE's Storage Insight is the best on the market
It depends on what kind of requirement you will use with this All-Flash Storage Array.
Usually, high random IOPS is a must for AFA, however, recently there are more and more requirements that are talking about low latency as the key in the virtualization environment. So if you would like just for high random IOPS and MBPs, considering the SAS SSD AFA will be enough, but if lower latency will be your major impact in the environment, NVMe AFA will be the best.
https://blog.qsan.com/why-does...
NImble Storage from HPE or Primera, Hitachi sold their disk division. HPE 3Par will be announced soon as the end of life.
Instead, Primera has been created (Primera has the best from Nimble and 3Par). I hope it helps.
I think that you need to meet the needs looking to the best fit to your environment. Looking into Hitachi Vantara portfolio, you will see entry level storage to enterprise. At my point of view, performance, reliability and scalability should be considered.
Another consideration above performance (IOPS and latency), you must to provide the correct profile, such as block size, random or sequencial data, cache hit, replication and snapshots needs. All those informations provides a better solution for your environment.
Dont you forget about the scalability, I think that you must to know how you are growing to fit the best equipment.
Take a Dorado 3000 V6 form Huawei. Huawei OceanStor Dorado V6 all-flash storage sets new benchmarks in storage performance and reliability. The OceanStor Dorado delivers best-in-class performance of up to 20,000,000 IOPS. With the AI chips they are the first in the industry to deliver storage systems that get more intelligent
during the application operations.
Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series.
Hi,
Just assess Pure Storage box as well and also if you are focusing on some specific workload do mention it while discussing with the Pure Storage team like OLTP, DB(SQL/Oracle) or any platform service, etc. At last, your budget is also a major factor while evaluating. As all Flash Arrays do cost more.