Compare HPE 3PAR Flash Storage vs. IBM FlashSystem
HPE 3PAR Flash Storage is ranked 1st in NAS with 31 reviews while IBM FlashSystem is ranked 2nd in NAS with 10 reviews. HPE 3PAR Flash Storage is rated 8.8, while IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of HPE 3PAR Flash Storage writes "The product's technical support is outstanding as I can reach someone right away". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "Virtualization significantly decreases the data migration time". HPE 3PAR Flash Storage is most compared with Dell EMC Unity XT, Nimble Storage, EMC VMAX, Pure Storage FlashArray and HPE StorageWorks MSA, whereas IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell EMC Unity XT, Pure Storage FlashArray, Nimble Storage, NetApp FAS Series and Compellent. See our HPE 3PAR Flash Storage vs. IBM FlashSystem report.
Sponsored | ||
Most Helpful Review | ||||||
|
| |||||
 Find out what your peers are saying about HPE 3PAR Flash Storage vs. IBM FlashSystem and other solutions. Updated: July 2020. 426,653 professionals have used our research since 2012. | ||||||
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros | ||
Things that have been really useful, of course, are the clustering features and being able to stay online during failovers and code upgrades; and just being able to seamlessly do all sorts of movement of data without having to disrupt end-users' ability to get to those files. And we can take advantage of new shelves, new hardware, upgrade in place. It's kind of magic when it comes to doing those sorts of things. The ease of use, the SnapMirror capabilities, the cloning, and the efficiencies are all good features. We are using the AQoS operating system, which allows us to get a lot more out of our AFF systems. The most valuable features are the ease of administration and configuration, as well as the speed of deployment. The most important features are the IOPS and the ease of the ONTAP manageability. Before we implemented AFF, Oracle was running on a traditional storage spindle and at a very low speed with high latency, and the database was not running very well. After we converted from the spinning disk to the all-flash array, it was at least four times faster to access the volume than before. The most valuable features of the solution are speed, performance, and reliability. The most valuable feature is speed. | The most valuable feature of this solution is the native full mesh (multi-pathing). Remote-copy provides high availability and disaster recovery for the connected clients. Any action we want to do with a Dell EMC product needs a license. But with 3PAR's converged solution, at least there is no need to purchase more licenses to get the all the features that we need. We can get basic and mid-range features without licenses. Technical support for both 3PAR and Dell EMC in my country, Iran, is very difficult because we are under sanctions. We have been able to scale faster and get our applications out in much less time. We don't need to worry about the platform's ability to manage the workload, so we are pretty happy. The InfoSight feature helps us with troubleshooting problems in our environment. We can do more, faster, whether it's spinning up more virtual machines or handling large amounts of data. The availability of the server has given us increased stability in our environment. | The ability to create LUNs and modify them are the most valuable features of this solution. The most valuable features are deduplication and compression. We are a 100% satisfied with the stability of the solution. Stability-wise, this solution is fine. The feature I find most valuable, is the deduplication, because the nature of the data that we are using in our current environment, has a lot of replicated data. The performance of the All-Flash System is very good. There is more enhanced performance and data production in the solution, which I appreciate. The initial setup was really straightforward. It was not complex. Deployment took one month, due to the data migration duration. They have a virtualization feature and, even if you do not want to buy that feature, you can have it as a trial for two to three months. If you have another brand of storage from another company, you can use this tool to transfer all your data from the old system to the new Storwize system, which really shortens the migration time. |
Cons | ||
One of the areas that the product can improve is definitely in the user interface. We don't use it for SAN, but we've looked at using it for SAN and the SAN workflows are really problematic for my admins, and they just don't like doing SAN provisioning on that app. That really needs to change if we're going to adopt it and actually consider it to be a strong competitor versus some of the other options out there. There are little things that need improvement. For example, if you are setting up a SnapMirror through the GUI, you are forced to change the destination name of the volume, and we like to keep the volume names the same. The quality of technical support has dwindled over time and needs to be improved. On the fiber channel side, there is a limit of sixteen terabytes on each line, and we would like to see this raised because we are having to use some other products. The certification classes are good, but they don't cover enough of the material, and the exams only test on what is covered in class. The monitor and performance need improvement. Right now we are using the active IQ OnCommand Unified Manager, but we also have to do the Grafana to do the performance and I hope we will be able to see the improvement of the active IQ in terms of the performance graph. It should also be more detailed. Tech support is a place where there is room to improve the product experience. The response time when they are busy is not very good. The price of NVMe storage is very expensive. | I would like to have support for On-The-fly reallocation Data when using VVoL. The cloud-based monitoring Infosight would be better if users are automatically enrolled in the cloud/group based on the configuration or information gathered or uploaded on the internet. I give it an eight because of the support, that I can't get support in my country. This is the worst part. Support cannot be sold until we are out of the sanctions. I think cloud integration would probably be the biggest part, because that's where everyone is going and the seamless integration between on-premise and cloud is an important part of any IT strategy today. This solution is becoming dated. We had a minor error when we were configuring this system, which initially detracted from its overall stability. This solution should be easier to use. I would like to see improvement in the product's scalability. As a partner, I had serious problems because of the competition from Dell EMC and Pure. | Enterprise data storage needs improvement. They should create a feature for data and file storage. The ease of installation should be improved. We had issues with the configuration model. I think the only thing the developers can look at, is that it is limited to 25 gigabytes currently. In the next release they might want to increase that. This solution needs a management console where we are alerted to issues and can report them, or escalate them through email or another method. I would like to see an improvement in the handling of large amounts of rights. 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 solution is not able to replicate data in one-to-many scenario. I have looked at a few pages of a report I download and I saw a graph there regarding software-defined vendors. IBM is not in a good position on this graph. I know that they are working very hard on this, to make it much better and to get to a level where it's not only hardware but also software to provide a complete solution. |
Pricing and Cost Advice | ||
It's expensive. it's in the hundreds of thousands. It's beneficial, but at times, I feel compared to other vendors, we are paying a premium for the licensing that other vendors include. The price to performance ratio with NetApp is unmatched by any other vendor right now. The pricing is not a lot considering what you get and it bundles hardware and licensing. Comparing this solution to others it may seem expensive, but the price to performance for NetApp is greater. We would like it to be free. One of the reasons we like this solution is that all of the features are included with the one license. We don't like the cost. We would like to buy more. It definitely reduces costs because it simply takes less power to run these systems. While the SSDs don't take power, they are in general very big right now. So, the running cost has decreased for a lot of our customers. | The cost is reasonable given that the licensing is all included once you purchase it. This licensing fees for this solution are merged with all of our HP annual costs, which in total are a couple hundred thousand dollars. We do not have any licensing fees. I would like it to be cheaper. Our licensing cost are $32,000 annually. For the entire six node cluster and the two 7200 units plus the Brocade Fibre switches, we financed it through HPE Financial. It was $850,000. We leased that and paid it off in October of 2018. I have to renew support in October for the existing solution. That will cost me roughly $50,000 this year, which in the grand scheme of things, $50,000 is not that much compared to paying $850,000. However, it will be the last year that I'll be able to get direct support from HPE. Therefore, product has to be replaced in 2020. We went with 3PAR because we have HP-UX systems. Since we already knew HP-UX, they offered us a significantly cheaper solution than the one that we had for storage. | For a yearly license, it is about $100,000. There are no additional costs. The entire system is included. The pricing has been very competitive for the last few years. IBM got to the point where they changed the pricing model and we feel very comfortable with the pricing. It's very competitive. Over the last two years, IBM has been coming up with all kinds of interesting promos, especially for the SMB systems. That makes it very competitive price-wise and in terms of performance... |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NAS solutions are best for your needs. 426,653 professionals have used our research since 2012. | ||
Popular Comparisons | ||
 Compared 30% of the time.  Compared 21% of the time.  Compared 8% of the time.  Compared 6% of the time.  Compared 3% of the time. | Compared 19% of the time. Compared 11% of the time. Compared 5% of the time. Compared 5% of the time. Compared 4% of the time. | Compared 22% of the time. Compared 12% of the time. Compared 6% of the time.  Compared 6% of the time. Compared 4% of the time. |
Also Known As | ||
| NetApp All Flash FAS, NetApp AFF, NetApp Flash FAS | InServ, Storeserv, 3PAR Flash Storage, HP Enterprise Storage, 3PAR Flash Array, HP 3PAR Flash Storage | IBM Storwize |
Learn | ||
| NetApp | Hewlett Packard Enterprise | IBM |
Overview  | ||
NetApp AFF8000 All Flash FAS systems combine all-flash performance with unified data management from flash to disk to cloud. Leverage the Data Fabric to move data securely across your choice of clouds—enabled by Cloud ONTAP™ and NetApp Private Storage for Cloud. Plus, you get the industry’s most efficient and comprehensive integrated data protection suite, on premises or in the cloud. | HP 3PAR all-flash storage accelerates business agility by boosting application performance with over 900,000 IOPS at less than 0.7 ms latency. And it does this while delivering all the enterprise-class, Tier-1 features and functionality you expect from the storage platform that powers three of the world’s four largest managed service providers. | IBM FlashSystem products are enterprise computer data storage systems that store data on flash memory chips. Unlike storage systems that use standard solid-state drives, IBM FlashSystem products incorporate custom hardware based on technology from the 2012 acquisition of Texas Memory Systems. This hardware provides performance, reliability, and efficiency benefits versus competitive offerings. |
Offer | ||
Learn more about NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) | Learn more about HPE 3PAR Flash Storage | Learn more about IBM FlashSystem |
Sample Customers | ||
| Acibadem Healthcare Group, AmTrust Financial Services, Citrix Systems, DWD, Mantra Group | Just Energy, Latisys, team AG, DreamWorks, BlueShore Financial, Erasmus MC | Celero, Friedhelm Loh Group, Clarks, Mingkang Natregro Health Food Group, Sofia, Etisalat Fights Fraud, UF Health Shands Hospital, Generali, Elecon Engineering Company Limited, Ventiv , Technology, CPFL Energia, Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd., SciQuest, Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated, Paddy Power, Kelsey-Seybold Clinic, Interconnect Services, Severstal IP-Only AB, PVU Group GmbH |
Top Industries | ||
Healthcare Company16% Financial Services Firm13% Energy/Utilities Company9% Retailer8% Software R&D Company35% Manufacturing Company19% Comms Service Provider10% Government4% | Financial Services Firm21% Healthcare Company11% Manufacturing Company9% Retailer6% Software R&D Company34% Comms Service Provider15% Government7% Financial Services Firm7% | Financial Services Firm27% Government15% Comms Service Provider12% Healthcare Company8% Software R&D Company39% Comms Service Provider11% Financial Services Firm7% Media Company6% |
Company Size | ||
Small Business12% Midsize Enterprise12% Large Enterprise76% Small Business26% Midsize Enterprise6% Large Enterprise69% | Small Business18% Midsize Enterprise23% Large Enterprise59% Small Business23% Midsize Enterprise14% Large Enterprise63% | Small Business41% Midsize Enterprise15% Large Enterprise44% Small Business33% Midsize Enterprise16% Large Enterprise51% |
Find out what your peers are saying about HPE 3PAR Flash Storage vs. IBM FlashSystem and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.
426,653 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our list of best NAS vendors, best Modular SAN vendors, and best All-Flash Storage Arrays 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.