We performed a comparison between HPE 3PAR StoreServ and SolidFire 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 is fast and reliable. It works."
"The speed is one of the most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray."
"It is easy to deploy and it's all-flash, so it's very fast."
"The stability is very good. I've done destructive testing on it and never had any type of storage outages from it."
"Performance, deduplication, compression, and fast response time for requests from servers and applications."
"I like FlashArray's ActiveCluster as well as its snapshot and cloning capabilities."
"The deduplication and compression rates are beyond impressive."
"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."
"The speed is very good."
"It provides very fast deployment. The performance for our most critical applications is very quick."
"Multi-tier storage was the primary reason that we bought it. I also love the interface that you use for administering it."
"It is very stable. That is why we bought it."
"We like something called Virtual Volumes and how we can do thin provisioning."
"After being properly configured, it has been a very stable product."
"3PAR is easy to keep running and does not require too much effort. It has been very reliable, which is key."
"The product has definitely improved throughput. We are able to more efficiently see patients because all of our medical records and practice management software seems to run faster. Uploading images and charts is a lot faster. Recalling information in the exam rooms is faster. The overall throughput of data, going back and forth, is so we can more efficiently see patients, and it also helps increase our patient flow. We can see patients a lot faster, getting them in and out a lot more quickly."
"The scalability and being able to implement it quickly."
"The provisioning process is efficient and doesn't demand higher latency, ensuring optimal data transfer performance which is particularly valuable for tasks like data mining, where quick results are essential."
"I would say in terms of architecture and in terms of functionality, the product is quite good."
"Overall performance of the solution."
"The square footage for doing development is at a premium when dealing with government networks. To be able to put a lot of IOPS in a lot of high-speed performing drives in a very small location which requires very little HVAC with very little power, it is very valuable to us."
"Greater IOPS, speed, it's all-flash. So seeing that everything is going to all-flash, all SSDs, SolidFire fits right in there with the emerging trend in IT."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The dashboard is such that you don't need to be a storage expert to administer it."
"The connectivity needs improvement. You do not have the possibility to have a file and block connectivity at the same time on the same machine. It has limited ability to do so."
"In the next release, I would like to see file-level encryption."
"We haven't seen ROI yet."
"If they could make it cheaper, that would be something."
"The data reduction that we had initially anticipated when we bought Pure and we move over, is way lower than the expected reduction. It depends on the workloads, of course. But that has been a challenge at times."
"The support for NFS protocols right out-of-the-box need improvement. I'm used to other storage vendors who have NFS support right out-of-the-box, and Pure Storage doesn't seem to have anything."
"Beyond a certain amount of petabytes, you have to have a separate system. Basically, it's not infinitely scalable."
"I would love to see a true one click upgrade solution. Right now, you have to click and schedule an appointment with Pure Storage to be able to upgrade. I would love for it to automatically download, install, and fall-over every controller as it updates."
"Would like to see some management functions through a web interface."
"We've started to see an issue with the older models that we have. We've had issues where facilities would have unscheduled power outages or scheduled power outages and the 3PARs weren't able to come up successfully. We actually had an incident recently where it wiped data that we didn't anticipate would be wiped."
"The solution lacks reliability."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ's pricing could be cheaper."
"3PAR has StoreOnce and replication. I would like it if they worked together. Or, if I had Nimble and put that either in DR or a primary cohesive management, but still use the cool features of 3PAR, that would be awesome."
"The tool needs improvement in the utilization report at the granular level."
"We would like to see dedupe and compression allowed on all drive types."
"In new releases, I'd really like to see it more targeted towards hyper-converged. They are working that way with Greenlake and integrating their own "build your own" expansion environment within 3PAR."
"So feature-wise, I would say more reporting tools that could be merged into it."
"Though it is a stable solution, its users may face some security issues at times...The security provided by the solution is one area that can be improved."
"The inclusion of more protocols and interfaces would make it easier to integrate with other products."
"We had some false positives, power supplies failing, and that's really been about it. We had a couple of glitches during some upgrade processes but nothing that was really concerning to us."
"When you set up the nodes, we have to serial into each one of these nodes to configure the IP ranges. It's still very easy, but it's time consuming."
"The upgrade process could be better."
"For example, the ease of use with the reporting. Right now it's not impossible, but you have to know Sequel. It's a little time consuming to get those customized reports in there."
"This solution would be improved if it were made to be more compatible with other products."
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 9th in All-Flash Storage with 299 reviews while SolidFire is ranked 19th in All-Flash Storage with 33 reviews. HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.6, while SolidFire is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of HPE 3PAR StoreServ writes "The product's technical support is outstanding as I can reach someone right away". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolidFire writes "A versatile storage solution suitable for various workloads in cloud environments providing scalable architecture, granular Quality of Service and consistent performance". HPE 3PAR StoreServ is most compared with HPE Primera, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, NetApp AFF and IBM FlashSystem, whereas SolidFire is most compared with NetApp AFF, Dell PowerStore and VMware vSAN. See our HPE 3PAR StoreServ vs. SolidFire 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.
