We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem and IBM XIV based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, IBM, Hewlett Packard Enterprise and others in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network)."This solution is very stable."
"When it comes to the interface of the solution we did not encounter any challenges. Additionally, the solution has good documentation."
"The installation is nice and easy."
"The storage system is one of the best in the world."
"The performance of the All-Flash System is very good. There is more enhanced performance and data production in the solution, which I appreciate."
"IBM FlashSystem is a flexible solution with plenty of features."
"This solution is convenient, user-friendly, convenient and reliable."
"IBM FlashSystem is flexible, quick, and has a solid design."
"Installation is amazingly easy."
"Hands down, this is the easiest storage platform on the market to manage."
"Very easy to produce reporting data (Snaps). Very easy and fast for provisioning devices and Remote mirroring."
"As it spreads, a chuck of 1MB across the board means using all available spindles on the backend."
"The performance and robustness of the systems are very good."
"IBM XIV's most valuable features are NVME, especially when it comes to de-duplication, compression, and responsiveness."
"Sometimes the performance is effective but it gets resolved in the process."
"The marketing could be improved."
"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 would like to have a larger disk. Right now, you can get 57 terabytes in a shelf. Once they get the larger disk and you get larger capacities, it'll be even better."
"The deduplication and compression ratio is not very good. It's not reaching a very high ratio."
"The pricing needs to be more competitive."
"GUI interface should be enhanced more as there is some issues in copy services."
"Until the drive is replaced, the pool_resizing is locked."
"I would rather have a web GUI served directly from the unit, and a CLI accessible directly through SSH."
"This product was not a good fit for our organization as we have a ton of latency sensitive applications and XIV was not able to keep up with IO + latency demand."
"The change form synchronous mirroring to asynchronous (and vice versa) without reconfiguration from scratch would be helpful."
"I encountered stability (performance) issues during enclosure or disk rebuild. Also some power supply issues due to malfunctions of circuits. Sometimes "internal" Snap sessions hang and consume pool capacity."
"IBM XIV's scalability is adequate for our requirements, but because it's modular, you can't scale to larger requirements."
IBM FlashSystem is ranked 2nd in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 106 reviews while IBM XIV is ranked 10th in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 6 reviews. IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2, while IBM XIV is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM XIV writes "Using it behind the SAN volume controller, latency is predictable and it is reliable". IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Dell Unity XT, NetApp AFF and Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, whereas IBM XIV is most compared with .
See our list of best Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) vendors.
We monitor all Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) 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.
