Nimble Storage vs Pure Storage

Nimble Storage is ranked 3rd in All-Flash Storage Arrays with 59 reviews vs Pure Storage which is ranked 6th in All-Flash Storage Arrays with 9 reviews. The top reviewer of Nimble Storage writes "The VMVision feature grabs stats from our VMware environment. It allows us to troubleshoot our environment in one view". The top reviewer of Pure Storage writes "Some of the features are low latency, inline deduplication, and compression". Nimble Storage is most compared with HPE 3PAR Flash Storage, Pure Storage and Dell EMC Unity. Pure Storage is most compared with NetApp All Flash FAS, Dell EMC XtremIO Flash and Nimble Storage. See our Nimble Storage vs Pure Storage report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
+Add products to compare
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Nimble Storage vs Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage Arrays.
291,145 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Quotes From Members Comparing Nimble Storage vs Pure Storage

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
InfoSight - analytics sight that collects data for all Nimble arrays deployedInfoSight. It's AI for the data center. It's very easy, it does a lot of the work for the customer... InfoSight and the whole system, help them to deal with troubleshooting.Our virtual admins are able to take control of Nimble and know how to allocate the storage, whenever it is required, thus reducing time.The most valuable feature is InfoSight, and the ability that InfoSight gives you, from insight within your environment to what is going on at the storage layer.It's easy to use, it's just like 3PAR. I made clusters of 32 hosts with 50 volumes and that took barely an hour. I scripted a lot of it, filled in the names of volumes, the names of servers.InfoSight provides real-time reporting, it gives you information about your different volumes, how the arrays are being used, I/O, performance in general.Scalability is another reason we chose to go with Nimble: upgrading to another storage array. If we need higher capacity or throughput, we can just replace controllers, we don't have to replace or forklift-upgrade the whole chassis.I use InfoSight quite a bit. It works well. It allows you to get some insight into what's happening in your environment immediately, instead of having to send things off and having them analyzed and sent back to you.

Read more »

The best feature is consistently lower latency, even when IOPS crank up to over 75K. The product maintains submillisecond response time, which is incredible.The most valuable features are extremely low latency, high IOPS with VMware, inline deduplication and compression.The amount of data that I have moved to it from legacy storage has enabled us to retire units that are three or four times the physical size.The deduplication and compression rates are beyond impressive.I never have to worry about its performance or if it is the root cause of an issue.It has made working with storage as easy and simple as it should be.The GUI is very easy to use and intuitive.Non-disruptive upgrades: You can upgrade at anytime without worry.

Read more »

Cons
We have had some stability issues with one array which has happened twice during subsequent software updates but is due to a bad Postgres database.The solution that I have is a hybrid, not a full flash. The hybrid version could be improved.I want it to be an active-active array. Nimble would be great as an active-active array because then everything checks out. It would give a feeling of comfort.The only thing I'm really looking for in my next array is some hyperconverged, so if they had something in that space... But I know they have SimpliVity so that is probably not going to happen.The only thing that I can really compare Nimble to is all-flash because, right now, Nimble is a hybrid solution. I would like to see them come out with an all-flash alternative.I'd also like to see them incorporate tools that let me get granular with the VMs. I want to see an individual VM, I want to Snapshot and recover an individual VM.I would like to see native network attached storage (NAS) functionality. Our customers are looking for NAS, and Nimble can't give it to them.There are customers who want to do some different things with the Microsoft Resilient File System. There are some customers who want to do different types of connectivity. I do not know if I would call that an improvement, necessarily, because if you want that, you should get a different product.

Read more »

I would like to see a Nagios monitoring plugin which watches the health and performance of the system. The only one available just checks volume capacity.I’d love to view the average, minimum and maximum performance in the reports (Analysis tab - Performance) but it is only graphics and you need to export data in CSV to find this information.Just some nit picky stuff, like allowing servers and volumes to be grouped. Therefore, it would easier to work with them in the GUI.I would like some form of QoS implemented. As a service provider, it would be beneficial to have it.I would like to see more detailed reporting on the data. However, it would be nice to know what are the exact VMs usage after deduplication and/or what that VMs actual latency and bandwidth is, outside of VMware.The internal garbage collection process has been fixed recently in some OS updates so it is more efficient but that could be just a little better.Had some issues with Purity not being entirely compatible with VMware ESXi.The number of Filesystems is limited, which it is not on the EMC VNX.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Nimble has really met all of our needs and at a price we could afford. It certainly wasn't as expensive as a lot of other all-flash solutions that we could have bought.If we had stuck with EMC, we would have spent a lot more. We have EMC in-house, we have a bunch of them. Switching to Nimble saved me millions of dollars over the past three years... Nimble fills a need for performance within a budget that is in the sub-million dollar range.The first two that I bought were incredibly expensive, compared to the last five to seven that I have bought. The price has come way down, and it has been a year or so since we bought one.If you are a super small company, the product is probably not right for you. It is out of your price range. Anything from mid-SMB up to enterprise, it is absolutely the right product.It is very pricey. You pay for what you get, and this storage solution is great. It is well worth the cost.It is cost-effective, which is important for a service provider, because you're competing with hyper-scale providers who do things at extremely large scale, who tend to kill you on price if you're not careful.It is expensive, but it is worth the “uptime”.Competitive. No licensing. Since everything is included.

Read more »

For pricing, you have to take into account their performance on deduplication and compression in a $/GB comparison.It is a more expensive solution, but it is worth it. You are getting what you paid for.The price was slightly higher than others, but competitive, if you consider all the other features that you get from it.There is always room for negotiation.We feel that the pricing is fair and the licensing process was easy for both.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions are best for your needs.
291,145 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Answers from the Community
Rhea Rapps

These are my experiences with both storage arrays:

Nimble has recently been bought by HP so it’s future is uncertain
Both are able to snapshot and replicate to another SAN of the same brand
PURE does not need to integrate with vSphere for Snapshots, Nimble has to integrate with vSphere to snapshot VM’s with SQL server installed which can cause errors with snapshots and causes some storage volume limitations
Nimble has iSCSI toolkits for Windows and Linux to make setting up multi-pathing and setting up new connections easier, PURE does not
PURE is more expensive
PURE has much higher IOPS due to the all flash array
PURE has better data reduction through compression and deduplication
PURE has a longer lifespan with their highest level of support that will replace the entire SAN as it becomes obsolete
The Nimble user interface seems to be more intuitive from my perspective
Nimble firmware upgrades can be performed by IT staff
PURE support has to perform the firmware upgrades for you

Overall I would choose PURE over Nimble.

29 June 18

Hands down Pure Storage over Nimble. The main reasons I choose Pure are for all the capabilities and benefits. The deduplication and compression capabilities of Pure wins it for me. If you have an extensive workload, this is the choice you want to make. Other benefits would be the Forever Flash M&S. Pure offers to replace the hardware and software forever and upgrade the controllers every three years forever at the same price you first purchased... you guessed it forever. That means that your CAPEX remains lean and expected forever. This is the hassle free choice financially and the best choice technically for our ever growing and changing IT environment.

28 June 18
Shu MookerjeeReal User

I feel this is akin to a "Ford" vs "Chevy" debate; both are quality products but it depends on personal preference. Both Nimble and Pure have roughly the same performance characteristics, ease of use and installation and similar feature set.

However, I recently installed a Nimble AF1000 in our data center and am really impressed with it. It took almost no time to set up, has a very intuitive interface and is handling our applications extremely well (although, in all honesty, we're not really overtaxing it).

What really sells Nimble for me, however, is InfoSight. It's easy of navigate and presents a wealth of analytics data. The analytics aren't just limited to the storage...I can get a very comprehensive view of my hosts and network performance. We also were able to architect a D/R solution for one of our clients with only their InfoSight data. It was comprehensive enough to give us everything we needed to develop our architecture.

28 June 18
MK5User

A big + for Pure from my point of view is the HA Active/Active Metrocluster Feature. I think it is more important for the european Market. But for us it is a must although you are loosing a bit performance.

29 June 18
ITDirector253Real User

For me, the possibility to have a hybrid storage in the same platform as the pure flash is the defining advantage of Nimble.

29 June 18
Ranking
RANKING
Views
29,671
Comparisons
15,598
Reviews
57
Followers
1,620
Avg. Rating
9.2
Views
40,761
Comparisons
22,408
Reviews
9
Followers
1,536
Avg. Rating
9.6
Top Comparisons
Top Comparisons
Compared 19% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
See more Nimble Storage competitors »
Compared 19% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
See more Pure Storage competitors »
Website/Video
Website/VideoHewlett Packard Enterprise
Pure Storage
Overview
Overview

Our Predictive Flash platform closes the app-data gap, giving you the fastest, most reliable access to data. By combining predictive analytics with flash storage, we radically simplify operations. 
Once you’ve experienced our simplicity, you’ll never go back to traditional infrastructure again. Over 9,000 customers rely on Nimble to power their businesses, both on-premise and in the cloud.

Pure Storage is fresh and modern today and will be for the next decade. Without forklift upgrades or planned downtime. Pure Storage takes the work out of storage ownership Ð and delivers unprecedented customer satisfaction.
OFFER
Free Quote

We will send you a quote of Nimble Storage typically within 24 hours.

Free Quote

We will send you a quote of Pure Storage typically within 24 hours.

Sample Customers
Sample CustomersAce Relocation, Atkins Nutritionals, Berkeley Research Group, Canadian International School, City of Hot Springs, Clackamas County, Corona-Norco Unified School District, Ideal Integrations, Linear Technology, P&O Maritime, Retail Apparel Group (RAG), Virtual RadiologicNielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
Top Industries
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm
14%
Marketing Services Firm
6%
Real Estate/Law Firm
6%
Healthcare Company
6%
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company
17%
Government
17%
University
8%
Pharma/Biotech Company
8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm
18%
Healthcare Company
12%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
Government
7%
Company Size
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business
21%
Midsize Enterprise
43%
Large Enterprise
36%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business
19%
Midsize Enterprise
40%
Large Enterprise
40%
REVIEWERS
Small Business
22%
Midsize Enterprise
22%
Large Enterprise
56%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business
21%
Midsize Enterprise
20%
Large Enterprise
59%
Find out what your peers are saying about Nimble Storage vs Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage Arrays.
Download now
291,145 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