Compare NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) vs. NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays

NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) is ranked 4th in All-Flash Storage Arrays with 74 reviews while NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays is ranked 14th in All-Flash Storage Arrays with 10 reviews. NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) is rated 9.0, while NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) writes "Good price to performance ratio, no latency, and simple to use". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays writes "Doesn't require much maintenance as it's quite easy to use and very robust as a storage system". NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) is most compared with Dell EMC Unity, Pure Storage FlashArray and HPE 3PAR Flash Storage, whereas NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays is most compared with NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS), Dell EMC Unity and Pure Storage FlashArray. See our NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) vs. NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) vs. NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
399,757 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.

Read more »

The most valuable feature is the ability to set a specific margin of performance to a specific workload.The management software is very good.Rapid deployment, easy integration management and cloning of areas.The main advantage of this solution is performance.The solution allows us to segregate one storage unit from another.The stability, speed, and reliability are the solution's best features. The information is also very secure.This storage solution is both stable and scalable, and it works for our needs.The most valuable feature of this solution is its speed.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

I would like to have the ability to replicate data between All Flash and other NetApp storage systems.The price of the All Flash solution is very high.Their problems are on the software and the controlling of the storage where they lack segmentation and federation.This solution does not have any compression or deduplication.There could be better integration with some of our Cisco products.NetApp could improve the speed of the rebuilding rate.We need a center related to NetApp in Egypt so that we can deal with them directly.The pricing could be cheaper and it should have documentation in more languages, specifically, Russian.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

This solution is not available to many users because the cost is very expensive.Adding more capacity will increase the cost.The pricing is comparable with other competitors and similar in mid-range solutions, and for high range solutions, it would depend on our requirements or needs.The pricing of this solution is competitive with other vendors here in Egypt.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions are best for your needs.
399,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
4th
Views
25,898
Comparisons
17,135
Reviews
72
Average Words per Review
748
Avg. Rating
9.0
14th
Views
1,478
Comparisons
574
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
433
Avg. Rating
7.8
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
NetApp All Flash FAS, NetApp AFF, NetApp Flash FASNetApp EF540, NetApp EF-Series
Learn
NetApp
NetApp
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‚Äôs most efficient and comprehensive integrated data protection suite, on premises or in the cloud.

The NetApp EF560 all-flash array is an all-SSD storage system for applications that demand extremely high levels of performance and reliability. Requiring just 2U of rack space, the EF560 all-flash array combines extreme IOPS, microsecond response times, and up to 12GBps of bandwidth with leading, enterprise-proven availability features.

Offer
Learn more about NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS)
Learn more about NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays
Sample Customers
Acibadem Healthcare Group, AmTrust Financial Services, Citrix Systems, DWD, Mantra GroupRP Data, Western Oregon University, Toei Animation
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company16%
Financial Services Firm13%
Energy/Utilities Company9%
Retailer8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company22%
Manufacturing Company20%
Comms Service Provider10%
Financial Services Firm9%
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company28%
Media Company22%
Manufacturing Company11%
Energy/Utilities Company11%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business12%
Midsize Enterprise12%
Large Enterprise76%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business22%
Midsize Enterprise7%
Large Enterprise71%
REVIEWERS
Small Business29%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise54%
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) vs. NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
399,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all All-Flash Storage Arrays 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.