Compare NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays vs. Pure Storage FlashArray

NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays is ranked 14th in All-Flash Storage Arrays with 10 reviews while Pure Storage FlashArray is ranked 1st in All-Flash Storage Arrays with 104 reviews. NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays is rated 7.8, while Pure Storage FlashArray is rated 9.2. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashArray writes "A solution with high performance that is easy to install, troubleshoot, and manage capacity". NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays is most compared with NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS), Dell EMC Unity and Pure Storage FlashArray, whereas Pure Storage FlashArray is most compared with Dell EMC Unity, NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) and Nimble Storage. See our NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays 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 EF-Series All Flash Arrays vs. Pure Storage FlashArray and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
398,050 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
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 »

We also use VMware integrations developed by Pure, their plugins in our vCenter environment. They help by allowing our non-technical operations teams to deploy new data stores and resize data stores without me having to involve myself all the time to do those simple tasks.Their REST API is wonderful, well-documented, and easy to use.As soon as we introduced our first Pure Storage FlashArray, the first benefit was at least twice the performance increase. Our production databases simply ran twice as fast with no other change.Pure Storage technology allowed us to automate tasks, reducing something which started as a 12-hour turnaround down to about 15 minutes.The data reduction technology part of the scalability has been impressive, like its ability to host additional workloads, volumes of data, and databases.The performance is very good.For us, the most valuable feature is the compression and deduplication. Being able to deploy a three to one ratio for storage is absolutely critical in today's world with the growing need for storage and the growing need for more space.The ease of management is one of the most valuable features of this solution. I would have also said that it's pretty fast but now our SQL servers are starting to beat it up pretty bad.

Read more »

Cons
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 »

If they could make it cheaper, that would be something.The higher education moves slowly. We are still looking forward to implementing the full list of existing features.In terms of the future, I have been excited by some of the copy data management stuff that they're talking about building into the environment. There are feature sets where I've done a lot of automation work. So, I am always looking forward to extensions of their API. They're also talking about a phone home centralized analytics database being used as a centralized management console with a list of new cloud features, but this doesn't seem finalized.Storage. There could be better storage.The scalability of the solution is not as good as it probably could be.A year ago they promised that they would be able to read through the database encryption with more metric and they have not delivered on that patch, which is significant because it gives us back so much more storage room. We want to be able to read through the encryption.We would like to see better troubleshooting aspects. It helps us if we can find out where the problem is. Right now, it's difficult. Sometimes it's difficult to pinpoint the issue. If they had more visibility and more troubleshooting feature built into the tool that would really help.In the next release of this solution, we would like to see automated copy data management for SQL Server.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
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 »

In terms of other contemporary arrays, Pure is something you need to have a use case for, as it's not priced for you to buy one off-the-shelf. If you have a use case, heavy lift Oracle Databases, any type of noticeable virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI), or need low latency and high throughput, you should consider all-flash at least and probably Pure Storage.I don't know the exact cost but it's around $1,000.Pure has been flexible with us on the pricing models.We have 16 or 18 arrays. We like to do the three-year support model so that we get Evergreen and therefore, we get free upgrades. We pay around more than 1.5 million dollars.Our costs are around $100,000.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.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions are best for your needs.
398,050 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
14th
Views
1,478
Comparisons
574
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
433
Avg. Rating
7.8
1st
Views
39,442
Comparisons
22,209
Reviews
100
Average Words per Review
523
Avg. Rating
9.1
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
NetApp EF540, NetApp EF-Series
Learn
NetApp
Pure Storage
Overview

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.

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 EF-Series All Flash Arrays
Learn more about Pure Storage FlashArray
Sample Customers
RP Data, Western Oregon University, Toei AnimationNielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company28%
Media Company22%
Energy/Utilities Company11%
Retailer11%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm20%
Healthcare Company16%
Government10%
University8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company27%
Comms Service Provider11%
Financial Services Firm8%
Manufacturing Company7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business29%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise54%
REVIEWERS
Small Business23%
Midsize Enterprise19%
Large Enterprise58%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business26%
Midsize Enterprise15%
Large Enterprise59%
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays vs. Pure Storage FlashArray and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
398,050 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.