Compare NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) vs. Pure Storage FlashArray

NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) is ranked 4th in All-Flash Storage Arrays with 82 reviews while Pure Storage FlashArray which is ranked 3rd in All-Flash Storage Arrays with 86 reviews. NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) is rated 9.2, while Pure Storage FlashArray is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) writes "Supported our overall business initiatives, they've done a great job with cybersecurity ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashArray writes "The data reduction technology part of the scalability has been impressive, like its ability to host additional workloads, volumes of data, and databases". NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) is most compared with Dell EMC Unity, Pure Storage FlashArray and HPE 3PAR Flash Storage, whereas Pure Storage FlashArray is most compared with Dell EMC Unity, NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) and Nimble Storage. See our NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) vs. Pure Storage FlashArray 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. Pure Storage FlashArray and other solutions. Updated: July 2019.
353,754 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
Tech support has been absolutely amazing. I think on the technical aspects as well, my staff is able to get great support from the NetApp technical support resources that we have. What I love about NetApp is they have a health care division. At times, it's such an amazing thing because if we have a healthcare-related issue, there's no one better than having prior CIOs from health care organizations that NetApp has hired, and that are part of the health care team, to help out with any of those initiatives and support problems. Support has been absolutely phenomenal.The valuable features are the fabric pool. We are taking our cold data and pumping it straight into an estuary bucket. Also, efficiency. We're getting about two and a half times upwards of data efficiency through compaction, compression, deduplication, and it's size. When we refreshed from two or three racks of spinning discs down into 5U of rack space, it not only saved us a whole heap of costs in our data center environment but also it's nice to be green. The power savings alone equated to be about 50 tons of CO2 a year that we no longer emit. It's a big game changer.The features that I found most valuable are SnapMirror and SnapVault; these provide DR and backup for data redundancy.Its efficiency and scalability are the most valuable features.The most valuable features for AFF are the speed, durability, back up, the time, the workloads that we are using currently are much faster than what they used to be. We're getting a lot of different things out of All Flash.Previously we had migrated from Dell EMC and we had a lot of difficulties moving data around. Now, if we need to move it to any slower storage, we can move it with just a vault move within the cluster. Even moving data between clusters is extremely simple using SnapMirror. The mobility options for data in All Flash FAS have been awesome.NetApp tech support is so good. Their tech support has always been so stable and the people are so good in case of any failure or any good feature that needs to be updated or features that supposedly can help with performance to improve some performance. NetApp support is one of the best that I deal with.Scalability is excellent. If we need more space, it's a no downtime solution. It's harder to get the funding than it is to get the solution itself.

Read more »

It is pretty much just plug and play. There is not that much to do with it. It is very easy to use.The back-end data reporting for Pure Storage is phenomenal. The data that you can see on the performance of your customers' array, so you can be proactive about upgrades or enhancements, and is a phenomenal tool to have access to as a partner. I haven't seen this type of stuff out of anything of the other storage systems.The predictive performance analytics is a very good feature, as our system is performing better than before.The stability and performance are the best things about the solution.Because of the encryption, we have different storage and the encryption can go over both.The predictive performance analytics are good.It's reduced our overhead management time on storage, since it is so simple to get in and just provision a volume, present it to the host, and then you are done.The solution has probably reduced my power use substantially.

Read more »

Cons
The total cost of ownership has increased a little.I would like for them to develop the ability to detach the fabric pool. Once you've added it to an aggregate it's there for life and it would be nice to disconnect it if we ever had to.I would like to see an improvement in the high availability of the NFS and CIFS sharing during upgrade and patching; this would help to avoid downtime.The scaling needs improvement. NetApp is limited for scaling options.The bad part about having scalability is the expense. It is currently extremely expensive, to be able to scale so fast on flash.As for AFF itself, I don't have any suggestions of what I would be excited about seeing. I think that adding the support for the rest of APIs to AFF would be super handy. I think it's something that we've been waiting for for a while which would be fantastic.I would like to see the ability to include more applications from applications to managed storage. If we can have more applications or more interface in more applications, that would be great.I come tech support with difficulty because I installed NetApp for many years I know what to expect when I call. When I don't get their support tech that I'm expecting and I'm trying to get to the right one, it can get very frustrating for me personally, trying to all-flash push my way into the right person. NetApp has the right people, it's just a matter of getting to them.

Read more »

I would like the ability to swap out the network adapters into it. So, without taking out the whole controller, I would like to be able to swap adapters. This would make things easier.The setup needs to be improved the most. They can do a little more with the user interface, but the setup is what I would like to see made a bit easier.There are a lot of things to improve.It goes at about 95 percent, so we have had some performance issues. It is hard to clear them.We did have one hiccup with the integration of vCenter. When we were installing Pure Storage, we were using vCenter 6.7, which defaults to the HTML5 Web Client. The current plugin for Pure Storage doesn't show up in that client at all. You have to go and use the legacy FlexFlash client to see the Pure Storage plugin in vCenter.We have not seen a reduction in our TCO nor have we seen ROI.We haven't seen ROI yet.I would like to see some improvements on the FlashBlade side around the CIFS space support. I am not super familiar with all the different NAS protocols that they run on their box, but there could be some improvements made on SMB CIFS side.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
With other options, you need to buy a couple of different products to achieve the same outcome.Our TCO has increased by 15 to 18 percent.Using NetApp, our total cost of ownership decreased by 17%.Our TCO decreased significantly because we were paying maintenance on nine different arrays throughout the country. We've condensed those down to three arrays, and our maintenance fees from the IBM product dropped by over a half million dollars a year, saving us $500,000 USD.The total cost, the pricing of it, has gone up quite a bit.Disk level encryption is already in the solution, but it is very costly. Its pricing should come down.From an application standpoint, we have seen a lot of return investment on the speeds and responsiveness of the actual storage.Our total cost of ownership (TCO) has decreased by 40 percent.

Read more »

I have had a couple of customers who have complained about the cost. It can be a little more expensive than some of the other platforms. After it has been installed, I have never had a customer say, "I wish we wouldn't have spent all that extra money." They have always been happy with the product after it has been installed. They might be on the fence about it because of the price, but everybody who I have ever seen install it, they are always happy with it.We evaluated Oracle and Hitachi, but Pure Storage had the better pricing.The cost has room for improvement.Our Evergreen Storage subscription is supposed to be good when we go to upgrade.The cost has room for improvement.The Evergreen Storage subscription is a really cool concept. As long as we maintain our subscription, we will get new controllers every three years and really never have a forklift upgrade like we currently are doing. Just that future-proofing is an ease off of my mind to know that I won't have to do what I'm dong right now again.We have an Evergreen Storage subscription, which I think is a great feature.The licensing is $100,000.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions are best for your needs.
353,754 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
4th
Views
50,619
Comparisons
17,294
Reviews
83
Average Words per Review
591
Avg. Rating
9.1
3rd
Views
58,164
Comparisons
22,841
Reviews
84
Average Words per Review
484
Avg. Rating
9.1
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
NetApp All Flash FAS, NetApp AFF, NetApp Flash FAS
Learn
NetApp
Pure Storage
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.

Pure Storage FlashArray is the world’s first enterprise-class, all-NVMe flash storage array. It represents a new class of storage – shared accelerated storage, that delivers major breakthroughs in performance, simplicity, and consolidation. Pure Storage is fresh and modern today and will be for the next decade. Without forklift upgrades or planned downtime, Pure takes the work out of storage ownership and delivers unprecedented customer satisfaction.

Offer
Learn more about NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS)
See It In Action

Schedule Your Free Pure Storage Demo Now

Sample Customers
Acibadem Healthcare Group, AmTrust Financial Services, Citrix Systems, DWD, Mantra GroupNielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company16%
Financial Services Firm11%
Retailer9%
Energy/Utilities Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm19%
Healthcare Company15%
Manufacturing Company14%
Comms Service Provider6%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm18%
Healthcare Company16%
University9%
Manufacturing Company9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm24%
Healthcare Company11%
Government10%
Retailer9%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business11%
Midsize Enterprise12%
Large Enterprise77%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business23%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise64%
REVIEWERS
Small Business23%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise56%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business28%
Midsize Enterprise14%
Large Enterprise58%
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) vs. Pure Storage FlashArray and other solutions. Updated: July 2019.
353,754 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.
Sign Up with Email