We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystems and Pure Storage FlashArray based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: PeerSpot users find Pure Storage FlashArray easy to use and say it offers very low latency and excellent efficiency of their deduplication technology. The features in data protection, snapshotting, and replication between data centers and sites are better than many other solutions in today’s robust marketplace.
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reliability."
"The latency is good."
"It is very easy to install and configure. It has got excellent diagnostics. If you really need to see how the box is performing, the console gives you a lot of information. You can set thresholds as well as alerts based on the thresholds, which is a very powerful functionality. They are very proactive. They know how to monitor and manage the systems. They see a problem, and they are all over it before us. They see the problem before we see it, which is very good."
"It's incredibly easy to use and greatly simplified our ability to both deploy and manage our storage subsystems."
"The Pure1 component is most valuable at this point in time when comparing it with EMC. Pure1 is where you can have your diagnostics in the cloud, so you can look at things from your mobile phone."
"What I really like about this program, is that it is easy to use and easy to configurate."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe has low latency and high Ops. It is an evergreen model."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe will quickly overcome all the hurdles you face, including network and latency issues."
"The most valuable feature in demand is virtualization and its support storage of virtualization features."
"Ability to manage third-party arrays and virtualise them: One screen to control multiple arrays. Simplified administration."
"The compression and deduplication features are the most valuable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is compression."
"The solution allows for easy migrations from previous products or vendors via its embedded storage virtualization function."
"The speed and the ease of installation are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is that is supports a high IOPS rate."
"The most valuable features are, of course, the virtualization of the storage, the performance, and the compression."
"The most valuable feature is its data reduction."
"The stability is perfect. The reliability is 100% and the latency is always lower than 1 millisecond."
"Processes that used to take 40 minutes to two hours can be completed in five minutes."
"The most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray are simplicity, ease of use, and dashboard management."
"The reliability is very good."
"The top-tier support and reliable storage are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The speed is one of the most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray."
"Support has been helpful."
"The software layer has to improve."
"We've seen that when we create a POD in synchronous mode, it increases the latency."
"Right now, the box itself is just strictly working as a backend storage system. It would be fantastic if we could access it directly like a NAS device through network access or SIS drives. I think they have an interface, but I am not sure how good it is. If we could address a box directly on the network without having to go through a server, it would be great. The replication schemas could be improved. We are not using replication on the storage level right now. We use a different type of replication. If their replication would be as good as the one that we have, I would probably run the replication schema because it might be faster, but I don't know that for a fact. So, I cannot say that they have good replication. All I can say is that they need to inform us better."
"The tool's portfolio is minimal. It is expensive."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"Efficiency improvements would always be welcome, but I'm not sure if they could get more efficient."
"We would like to see VNC integration or be able to use Pure Storage with VNC."
"Our use cases require more multi-tenant capabilities and additional VLAN interfaces for separating different customers. We currently use it to provide storage, sometimes shared storage, to different customers, but it is less flexible in comparison to a dedicated solution."
"Additional licenses might be added for the fundamental licenses, such as those for copying and flash copies."
"The customer's expectations are what they get on the cloud, they're expecting even in the on-premises deployments, going forward."
"In IBM FlashSystem, data reduction is an area with shortcomings where improvements can be made in the future."
"Product support is restricted to IBM only. It must be decentralized to IBM partners as well."
"The installation is not easy. You need to have extensive knowledge to handle it."
"Events/log analysis tools."
"Customization features must be improved."
"They don't offer subscription-based payments."
"Currently, the solution fails to support file screening."
"They could improve the price."
"The primary drawback is the cost, which can be prohibitive for small configurations."
"We understand that they're thinking about it, but one of the things that would be nice is if they added some basic file-level capabilities to the platform. The idea is that they would run a basic NFS or CIF share from the controllers. FlashBlade is the powerhouse for File and Object storage, but if you don't need all that power, a lightweight file function would make FlashArrays more versatile."
"Pure Storage FlashArray could improve by being more secure."
"The integration capabilities could be improved."
"Areas for improvement would be the financial operations. In the next release, I would like to see a NAS protocol included."
"The number of Filesystems is limited, which it is not on the EMC VNX."
IBM FlashSystem is ranked 6th in All-Flash Storage with 106 reviews while Pure Storage FlashArray is ranked 3rd in All-Flash Storage with 174 reviews. IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2, while Pure Storage FlashArray is rated 9.2. 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 Pure Storage FlashArray writes "Effective provisioning, helpful support, and reliable". IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, NetApp AFF, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and Huawei OceanStor Dorado, whereas Pure Storage FlashArray is most compared with Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, HPE Nimble Storage, VMware vSAN and Dell Unity XT. See our IBM FlashSystem vs. Pure Storage FlashArray 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.