We performed a comparison between Pure FlashArray X NVMe and Reduxio [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage."With Pure Storage, we don't see any latency or IOPS. It has been a very seamless integration."
"It's easy to use, and the maintenance upgrades to get free controllers work really well."
"All our junior partners can administer the storage arrays. It is simple and easy to use. We don't have to dedicate a whole team of full time people to work on it."
"The GUI is very easy to use and intuitive."
"Cost, racial per terabyte, and speed is why we chose PureStorage. It was no brainer."
"It is easy to manage. You don't have to have the same people who used to manage the Dell EMC arrays because the solution is more intuitive."
"Most of the problems that we had in the past with the performance in IOPS have disappeared. It has been a great improvement for our customers' services."
"We put a fair amount of stress on it because we run sequel workloads and we run web applications where the same web files are hit over and over. We have had almost zero stability issues with that SAN, that has been really great for us."
"The most valuable features of Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its superior performance compared to other flash tiers, as well as its ease of use, with an intuitive user interface that is simple to deploy and use."
"Pure has signature security technology, which cannot be deleted, even if you are an administrator."
"Offers excellent features like efficient data reduction, a reliable SafeMode, and a great support model for continuous assistance and updates."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe will quickly overcome all the hurdles you face, including network and latency issues."
"It's incredibly easy to use and greatly simplified our ability to both deploy and manage our storage subsystems."
"It has benefited my organization because it has reduced time to insights."
"The duplication algorithm allows us to get a lot more use out of less storage. We're running a five terabyte array right now and we're running probably about 30 terabytes on it. So the duplication rate is pretty phenomenal, without a cost to performance. It still runs pretty smoothly."
"The solution is scalable."
"Reduxio allows you just spin a dial and go back to just about any time… in most cases (depending on the policies you’ve set) to go back within one second granularity for a couple weeks in the past."
"Takes advantage of deduplication and compression through as much of the content of VMs which are similar."
"I like the performance. I think it's what you call a hybrid SAN. It has solid state drives and, of course, regular optical drives, which would make performance a lot better, faster."
"Immediate data recovery: critical to business continuity in an age of unknown cyber threats."
"Reduxio requires zero upfront setup for backups. I get backups every single second for as long as I want with zero impact to performance."
"I have an every second undo button for all my applications. I call Reduxio "the ransomware killer"."
"It's very intuitive, has a very modern interface. Instead of making the user set up a million parameters for things that the system knows better anyway, they put all the intelligence in the product and made the controls much easier."
"Flexibility and frequency of restore points: allow me to economically customize the range of time for data restoration, according to the varying sensitivities of each type of data."
"The product should improve its response time. I have also encountered issues with its configuration."
"On a couple of occasions, the waiting time for an upgrade has been pretty substantial."
"Self-backup is the only feature lacking in this solution."
"The price of Pure Storage FlashArray could be better."
"Some services could be inserted directly into the SAN, so Pure Storage could complete with the HyperFlex."
"When we were doing some tests, we found that there was an I/O freeze when they were switching the controller."
"With scalability, I have run into a little problem with our last upgrade. There were some undocumented limitations to the number of drives that our controller could run on. So, instead of putting in a new data pack as we had anticipated, we had to keep adding and removing to get up to the capacity that we needed to be. What should have been a one day process (or a few hours) turned into a month and a half process."
"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."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"In fututre releases, some focus on anti-malware should be there."
"We have run into a couple of instances recently where we are running out of space. So we have had to buy some more packs for it and they have deployed fine and it has increased smoothly."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"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."
"The software layer has to improve."
"If the customer only needs 500 terabytes and doesn't care how much data they'll put in the server, IBM is cheaper than Pure."
"You cannot tag a LUN with a description, and that should be improved. What I like on the Unity side is that when I expand LUNs or do things, there is an information field on the LUN. This is the Information field that you can tag on your LUNs to let yourself know, "Hey, I've added this much space on this date". Pure lacks that ability. So, you don't have a mechanism that's friendly for tracking your data expansions on the LUN and for adding any additional information. That's a downside for me."
"The only thing that I would point out would be the basic administration management of the machine. Everything has rights, meaning that there's either all control or no delegated control. So to sum that up, it would be a feature request for delegated management in the administrative console."
"The only critique that we have is it needs the ability to have local users added. You have to log in as one built-in admin account. You can't create your own."
"The only thing that I'd like to see, at some point in time, is having the storage array being able to detect a ransomware attack. When you get hit by a ransomware it rewrites every block in your guest's virtual machine. So there should be a way for them to be able to detect that: "Hey, this is unusual, to see every block of this guest being rewritten all at one time," and then flag that as potential malware or ransomware."
"It would be helpful to have the ability to recover virtual machines individually without having to restore the full LUN."
"We had a brief hiccup, a brief outage, during one upgrade process, but it wasn't too extreme."
"The ability to look at data at a file level would be useful, as well as the ability recover at that level. Right now, you can only recover whole volumes."
"Scalability is a little unusual. We came from the NetApp world where, if you needed more disk space, you just added more drives into the chassis, whereas with Reduxio, if you need more disk space, you have to buy a new chassis."
"the only thing I would say negative about Reduxio is the cabling was a little bit confusing at first, but now that we understand it, it's easy. It was just so different from what we've seen before. That was the only hard part to get used to. The storage array is fully redundant, so there are some cross-connect cables that you have to run, from the A side to the B side, and the B side back to the A side, and we've just never seen anything like that before. But now that I understand the design, it makes complete sense. But initially it was confusing."
Earn 20 points
Pure FlashArray X NVMe is ranked 14th in All-Flash Storage with 28 reviews while Reduxio [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in All-Flash Storage. Pure FlashArray X NVMe is rated 9.2, while Reduxio [EOL] is rated 9.8. The top reviewer of Pure FlashArray X NVMe writes "Works well, is easy to implement, and has upgrade analysis capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Reduxio [EOL] writes "Its access speed and now its recently released features makes Reduxio not only an equal, but also better than your older version SANs". Pure FlashArray X NVMe is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and Pure Storage FlashBlade, whereas Reduxio [EOL] is most compared with .
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.
