HPE 3PAR StoreServ Other Solutions Considered

DW
IT Manager at BouMatic LLC

I worked with the team from HPE. We looked at their solutions, and selected 3PAR. We also looked at Dell EMC and Nutanix. At the time, when evaluating Dell EMC and other SAN products against 3PAR out-of-the-box, 3PAR just was vastly superior to anything else.

Working with the HPE team back in early 2014, they proposed the design. As it turns out, the SAN that we deployed in 2014 was the largest 3PAR SAN in the state of Wisconsin.

I just have a long history of HPE. I've tried Dell EMC and IBM before. IBM sold its server products to Lenovo. I always come back to HPE, especially the ProLiant brand, just because of the reliability and consistency through all the generations. You can look at a ProLiant 1000, never having seen one before, but if you know a Gen 9 or a Gen 10 today, if you could find a Proliant 1000 that was still operating, then you would know how to go in and configure it.

It is this type of consistency that keeps me with HPE. Dell EMC is all over the place. Lenovo has reliability issues.

View full review »
AT
Storage Admin at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

We are a multi-vendor shop, even today. We do have some IBM storage in our environment, but most of our critical applications sit on 3PAR.

View full review »
MR
Systems Engineer Manager at Ingles Markets, Incorporated

We looked at 3PAR, Nimble, and Pure storage.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
All-Flash Storage
March 2024
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Dell Technologies, NetApp and others in All-Flash Storage. Updated: March 2024.
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
it_user680235 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Systems Admin at a pharma/biotech company with 5,001-10,000 employees

I'm sure they probably looked at EMC, but I wasn't there for the initial sale. For now, we are staying with HPE.

View full review »
LV
ICT Director KA Infra at a transportation company with 1,001-5,000 employees

I have evaluated NetApp.

View full review »
MF
HPC Architect at Nuance Communications

We had been an HPE customer before, and when we first started with the MSAs, we had an issue where HPE got a batch of drives in from one of their vendors that had a bad firmware on it. Basically, we had to replace 960 drives with the system online.  HPE recognized replacing 750G drives with 500G drives was less capacity than what we purchased so they gave us three more arrays just so they could match the space. That was a huge turning point for us going to HPE. We have had vendors say, "It's your problem. Deal with it." We have had vendors walk away from us. For HPE to actually come up and do this, that was a big deal.

We benchmark vendor solutions ourselves, and knowing the internal technology that makes it work is important.

We had a project where we did get somebody else's storage. It got to the point where we could not keep it performing enough to keep up with the load. We ended up just getting rid of it after a year of problems.

View full review »
it_user254751 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Director, R&D Labs at Nuance Communications

The partners or the vendors we worked with in the past are EMC, NetApp, and IBM. We actually had their hardware in for testing. Some of them we actually bought, based on what we thought was the right thing to do, considering the performance we saw during our tests. But in the long run, the support we got from those vendors wasn't always what it's supposed to be, and the performance also was sometimes an issue. The advantage with HP is that when we have issues, HP always brought in their engineering team. We could discuss with them the issues we have, and they were always fixing our issues in a decent amount of time.

When we look at products, we're always interested in knowing what the other vendors and other customers are offering. Unfortunately, in our world, in the high performance computing world, we're not like a traditional corporate IT environment, where feature sets are really important and performance and latency need to be predictable. In our world, it's all about performance and latency, and if you can get the features with it, that's great, but the features are not really driving the effort.

View full review »
Wayne Cross - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Cyber Security at Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

We looked at all the other major vendors. We looked at EMC back then. We looked at IBM. IBM had some storage platforms back then as well. And since the transition, we have looked at some of the new players like Pure Storage. We looked at SimpliVity and Nimble before HPE bought them.

Some of them were just young. Most of those organizations came on about three or four years ago, so they were just coming onto the scene. While they were very innovative with their technology, with an organization that young, it's a risk to buy a platform when you don't know how long they're going to be around. If we had known HPE was going to buy them we'd probably be using them.

View full review »
PS
Storage Infrastructure Engineer at Cambridge Health Alliance

We have evaluated the IBM FlashSystem solution and we are switching everything over from HPE 3PAR StoreServ.

View full review »
JS
Solutions Architect at Optio Data

The big ones who comes up is obviously Dell technologies, VMAX and PowerMax, when I am looking for availability and performance. Another one that comes up a lot is Unity when we are looking at Nimble. Unity is a big player too right now. 

Also, what usually comes up quite a bit, is just Nimble. That is another one of those things where if I do not want all the nerd knobs, just a simple, great easy product that performs well, and if I want to be less focused on watching the data center moving forward, Nimble is a nice thing. The only thing that is missing right now is that synchronous for availability. They do not do synchronous replication, everything is asynchronous. Therefore, they are missing that availability, but it is on the roadmap for them. If peer persistence is not needed, Nimble is usually a great fit.

They chose HPE 3PAR because of the scale and the adjustability of it. If I need to get bigger, I can get pretty large with the product and still maintain good performance. There are not many vendors that go beyond the four nodes and maintain performance. Having the ability to scale from four to eight nodes allows that additional performance, because I can put 100 SSDs behind two controllers, but I will only be able to see about 20 disks worth of performance because I will outrun the controller. Therefore, getting that in the throughput  helps, but also in its ability to do Peer Persistence, which is the availability aspect where I can lose a whole 3PAR and it is seamless to the host. These are the biggest things: the availability and the speed of it.

View full review »
it_user485697 - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Engineer at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees

We did look at EMC instead of 3PAR for a little bit. We chose 3PAR because I've dealt with LeftHand before. Then, HPE bought LeftHand, namely 3PAR. I dealt with their storage stuff previously a little bit. I like what they were doing and how they were doing it.

It was just one of those things. I knew it. I was comfortable with it but it wasn't necessarily a front-runner until we started looking at EMC and just how convoluted their solution was to get there. The price at EMC was expensive. We had all these tertiary software you had to purchase just to get to run normally. There's still that with the 3PAR but it wasn't as steep of a cost. I wasn't paying for this huge EMC name.

View full review »
DV
Director of Technology at a university

When we were initially looking we priced out some IBM storage, obviously Compellent, some Dell stuff, EqualLogic. Realistically, we didn't want to go back with EqualLogic, mainly due to support.

With the Dells, they were telling us we could upgrade it, firmware and everything else on it, and we said, "No, we're going to hold off until we get another storage system in place and then we'll try that." When we migrated to the 3PAR, we went ahead and did a full upgrade on the Dell EqualLogic. It lost blocks, it lost about 12 drives, and I was thankful that we didn't actually need that data. We left the data on it while we did the upgrade just to see, following Dell support recommendations, what it would have done. Had we listened to them, we would have had, probably, multiple hours trying to figure out what data was actually misplaced, lost; and it had no way of telling us where it lost blocks. 

So from that perspective, we were nervous about doing a 3PAR upgrade which we did recently. We made sure all our backups were off of it prior to doing it. It had no problems during the upgrade, except that one card wouldn't upgrade, and they had to replace it. But there was no issue affecting any data, which is the primary purpose of having a storage system.

View full review »
TE
Solutions Architect

We evaluated Hitachi, NetApp, EMC, Dell, and 3PAR. We went with 3PAR because of price and the functionality had everything that we wanted it to do. Also, the presentation that the HPE team put together went really well.

View full review »
it_user233388 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Systems Engineer with 1,001-5,000 employees

We evaluated the Hitachi VSP and Netapp FAS 6800.

View full review »
RM
Systems And Storage Architect at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees

NetApp, Pure Storage, and IBM. We chose HPE because they checked all the boxes.

View full review »
WC
Director IT at Borden Ladner

All of the tier one vendors were on there: Dell EMC, etc. From a perspective of price point, performance, and integrity, we felt that HPE gave us the best value.

View full review »
RS
System Administrator at ON Semiconductor Phils. Inc.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing this solution.

View full review »
TS
IT Operations Manager at ACCC INSURANCE COMPANY

Our organization looked at NetApp and Pure Storage. Pure Storage was just too expensive. NetApp was good, but they did not have anybody familiar with the NetApp configuration.

Our biggest requirement was ease of use. HPE seemed to have all the pieces that we needed, and it easy enough to get somebody trained up on how to manage it.

View full review »
JohnMitchell - PeerSpot reviewer
jmitchell@natbankmw.com at NBM

Currently, we're looking at HPE Primera and Nimble Storage

View full review »
AD
Director of North America at a sports company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We only considered solutions by HPE because we have a partnership between our companies and they are our number one pick.

View full review »
PP
Sr. Storage Architect at a manufacturing company with 5,001-10,000 employees

We did consider other vendors. That's the reason we did a proof of concept and 3PAR was the winner. The other vendors on our short-list were EMC and NetApp.

View full review »
JW
Virtualization Systems Administrator at a university with 10,001+ employees

We also evaluated Dell. We chose 3PAR because of price and functionality.

There are some things out there now, such as HPE SimpliVity that do more things, and maybe we would like to go in that direction. Right now, we are doing a PoC with HPE SimpliVity. It seems to be working well, especially the backup solution that it has with it, where you can do snapshots. We really like that since 3PAR does not have this.

View full review »
RuiAlves - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at Proindustrial, Lda.

I tried to look, but it was more about the products that our IT partner had available than me choosing. They had previous experience with HPE and 3PAR, and they recommended it to us, and we followed their advice.

View full review »
RW
Systems Manager at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

We looked at Dell, Tegile, and Pure Storage. We went with HPE in the end because we already have HPE equipment, we're mostly HPE server and software, so we went with that. We're trying out the new Nimble now in our new data center.

When I evaluate vendors the important criteria are 

  • redundancy
  • scalability
  • performance
  • metrics for reporting.
View full review »
it_user331335 - PeerSpot reviewer
Database & Hosting Team leader at a media company with 5,001-10,000 employees

I did evaluate five other vendors, one example Nimble, however, at that time they only had iSCSI model available.

View full review »
AT
Director of Technology Services at a educational organization with 201-500 employees

We are an HP shop. It was natural for us to go with HPE for the storage solution. When we were looking, there were other solutions out there such as Dell EMC but we opted not to go with them. We decided to stick with an HPE brand solution.

View full review »
LA
System Engineer at GEBE

We are a fully HPE shop since 2000. Since then, we never really went over to a different vendor. We were approached by Dell EMC back then. They wanted to change up our whole server room and data center with their product. However, we are happy with HPE.

View full review »
EH
Principal Engineer at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees

Back then, it was HPE versus EMC.

View full review »
PS
Solutions Engineer at AmWINS Group, Inc.

From a storage perspective we've looked at some other vendors, but once the 3PAR 7000 series was announced with its capabilities, it made the most sense, being mostly an HPE shop.

View full review »
it_user238902 - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Architect at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees

We evaluated EMC, Nimble, IBM, NetApp, and Pure Storage.

View full review »
it_user567807 - PeerSpot reviewer
CIO at Bruggs Cable

There isn’t only one solution on the market. We already had the EMC systems. We were not limited to flash providers, so we also looked at Nimble and Hitachi and others.

At the end of the day, 3PAR was the most valuable. It was the most valuable solution. It was quite fast and it wasn't too expensive. Additionally, we could have an active-active scenario. That was for us the most important thing.

View full review »
it_user252627 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Solutions Analyst with 1,001-5,000 employees

It was purchased prior to me being there, so I’m not sure what else was considered.

View full review »
VK
GM at SAIL Bokaro Steel Plant

We purchased this solution with an open tender and we invited several vendors to present their products.

View full review »
TS
Head of IT Department at Sonepar

We evaluated a solution based on NetApp and ultimately, we decided to implement HPE.

View full review »
TM
Infrastructure Engineer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We've looked at Pure Storage, we've looked at Kaminario. We've looked at EMC's new VMAX. From a price standpoint, what you get - and with us moving towards VDI and having Synergy frames and SimpliVity on the market - it doesn't really make sense to switch. Do you really want to pull away now after you have invested so much? 

It's a matter of: "They're going down the right path so just keep following it." The reason we jumped ship for VNX back when we did was that, at the time, HPE stepped away from SAN and storage. Those were their bad years of MSA versus EVA and dropping away. They didn't really have an offering that fit that mid-tier storage that we were at. We had to do something. "Once bitten, twice shy", so now we'll look at EMC, we'll look at other vendors, but I always have a feeling we're going to come back to 3PAR.

View full review »
it_user568029 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Infrastructure and Security at a financial services firm with 51-200 employees

For the storage, we looked at Talent, which is now Dell. We also looked at Nutanix and Tintri. The main reason we chose HPE was that we already had an HPE infrastructure; and it felt like it was the best solution for our needs. The product met our requirements at the time.

Reliability is very important in a vendor. We also look at the breadth of offerings because we like to keep things simple. Rather than choosing a varied mix from a multitude of vendors, we like to go with a small number. I have a small team and it's easier from a management perspective, as well as understanding and supporting the product in the best way possible.

View full review »
it_user285930 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager, IT Infrastructure & Operations at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees

I think it’s a common theme for people in my position. I have an older array, it’s the generational investment coming up and we looked at a number of different models, different competitors but you know a big name like HP and a product like 3PAR and at the right price it was just all-all the stars aligned. We are an HP shop but I would have to say that it’s simplicity. In a couple of days we had this array running. We were able to test it out on multiple production level systems and kind of decide where is the best bang for the buck in utilizing that flash storage.

We were looking at Nimble Storage which was pretty close. I think the big differentiator there was the features set is pretty similar but I really like the approach of HP and I like the big name brand because the rest of my infrastructure is HP as well. We’re primarily an HP shop so given that I have such a lean team I only have myself, a system administrator, a network administrator, I can’t afford to have a lot of complexity in the way that my storage arrays are configured.


View full review »
BE
Enterprise Architect at Blessing Hospital School of Medical Laboratory Technology

We did not evaluate other vendors.

View full review »
SD
IT Manager at City Of Sparks

We looked at a few others, but I'm probably one of those people who just prefer to have one vendor for almost everything. I'm pretty much an HPE shop.

View full review »
it_user680247 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior system administrator at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

We have IBM solutions on the docket. We are really big. Our storage team has everything, so we actually brought in 3PAR to get it in-house.

View full review »
it_user561069 - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Administrator with 1,001-5,000 employees

We evaluated several other products and we were over sold on these arrays. At the time, we looked at EMC, Dell Compellent, Nimble, and IBM. At the time, HPE sales sold us what appeared to be a superior product, but that was really not the case and was a mistake.

View full review »
it_user484947 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at Continental Currency Services

We went with the HPE product because we really didn't have the need for such a big SAN. The company isn't big enough to warrant an EMC SAN. We're a midsize business, so the 3PAR was a perfect fit for us.

View full review »
it_user470361 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Director of Technology at Resorts World Las Vegas

I think it's some of the software features. They've done a good job, and there was always a good class enterprise storage area network. 3PAR's always been at the top. That was a very good purchase by HP when they purchased 3PAR a few years back. That gave them a good enterprise platform, storage platform, that they are now building onto it.

View full review »
it_user248730 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Systems Engineer with 501-1,000 employees

For us, it was about reliability. Our SaaS solution, our clients depend on and our clients' customers depend on on a daily basis, so that was number one. NetApp was a contender, but honestly we mostly looked just at HP 3PAR.

View full review »
it_user285345 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enterprise Architect at Alliance Resource Partners

Realistically, we ended up choosing HP. It was the more expensive solution at the time, but given the need for the performance, we also looked at a three to five year roadmap and the ability to continue to grow and the ability to add additional storage tiers within the same frame, that played a big part in it for us.

View full review »
it_user285360 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director, IT Infrastructure & Architecture at SOCAN

In the business that we're in, we deal with a lot of data. I like to think of ourselves as big data before big data was big data. We've been around since 1925. Obviously, there weren't computers back then, but a lot of the work that we did do as far as collecting performances was done paper based. In the last 25 years or so, we've since moved over to computer technology. In the last four or five years, what we've really seen with the advent of a lot of online musical sources, especially things like YouTube, Spotify, Netflix, we're seeing a larger influx of the amount of information that we're having to digest or ingest as an organization we do processing on.

So one of the problems that we have is the throughput or the IOPS that was available to us through traditional storage array, we had a traditional tier SAN storage array and we knew that with all the new tech-all the new data that's coming in, we had to ensure that we were positioned well to be able to handle the increasing amount of data that was being sent to us on a daily or weekly or monthly basis.

The HP solution to us made a lot of sense. When I was at HP Discover last year and I saw the keynote about the $2.00 per gigabyte, that intrigued me very much so. Flash has been around for awhile, but as everyone knows, it's been a very expensive technology. For a company like ours, we really strive to drive value to our members. We've considered a not for profit, meaning that for every dollar that we collect, what's not used for operational purposes goes right back to our members. So obviously the lower we keep the cost, the more money we give back to our members and the greater benefit we provide to them. So that was one of the most intriguing things about the solution.

The other thing that really drew me to the HP 3PAR flash solution was the architecture of it. Being an architecture person infrastructure person, it made a lot of sense to me. XtremIO is a great product. but again, it was a great architecture, but a different approach to solving the same problem that we sort of had to address with the HP 3PAR system.

Performance is very important to us. Like I mentioned, we get a lot of data, we do a lot of data processing for a company of our size, and of course, costs and value for our money is very, very important to us

View full review »
it_user251871 - PeerSpot reviewer
Storage Administrator at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

Just EMC, who were already in place.

View full review »
it_user194907 - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Team Lead at a energy/utilities company with 501-1,000 employees

We evaluated Hitachi HUS VM, and EMC alongside 3PAR.

View full review »
DB
IT Architect at a wholesaler/distributor with 10,001+ employees

The vendors that we evaluated were HPE and IBM.

View full review »
JN
ICT Country Manager at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees

We didn't have a shortlist. We worked directly with HPE.

The reasons for switching to HPE were:

  1. The performance. 
  2. The technology that HPE uses had more integration with our servers.
View full review »
JI
Engineering Manager at Leidos Holdings Inc.

We have looked at other vendors but a lot of them couldn't handle the capacity or the speed or the reliability that we needed.

View full review »
RS
Director at HCL Technologies

Other competitors in this marketplace are Dell EMC, NetApp, and Hitachi. These vendors are very competitive in terms of pricing.

View full review »
AD
Delivery Director at Schneider Electric

We evaluated some other vendors loosely, but we were more focused on HPE.

View full review »
CF
Global manager, servers and storage at a computer software company with 201-500 employees

We looked at NetApp, we looked at EMC, we looked at 3PAR, and 3PAR was the best fit for us totally.

View full review »
BK
Head Of IT Data Center at a consumer goods company with 5,001-10,000 employees

IBM. We went with HPE because the decision was, in the end, based on price. 

We had a list of required specifications, invited several vendors, they offered what they could. But in the end, when you get all of this matched, then the price decides.

For me, when we last did a purchase, last year or so, at that time flash drives and the deduplication were really important. Actually all of the vendors have it, offer it, but then we had some discussions looking at overall performance, resistance to disk failures and the like. I would say that HPE is the leader here.

View full review »
it_user680232 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Network Services at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees

Our shortlist included Nimble and 3PAR. One reason we changed was because we have local support.

View full review »
it_user567753 - PeerSpot reviewer
Global Head of Server and Storage Infrastructure at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

We were looking at NetApp and EMC.

View full review »
it_user486621 - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Engineering Manager at a aerospace/defense firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

We did a trade study between 3PAR and some of the other ones like Pure Storage. I would just say one thing we saw that I think could be helpful is maybe looking at dedupe and how their competitors are doing it, and making sure that they stay aware of what those other competitors are doing as well.

View full review »
CC
Director IT at a insurance company with 201-500 employees

HP is the only company that we've ever dealt with, so we did not evaluate options by other vendors.

View full review »
AM
IT Manager at a energy/utilities company

We didn’t really look at anybody other than HPE because we wanted a one stop solution for a single technical support problem, and we knew from Locigalis and from our years with HPE that they would give us an enterprise class solution the first time out.

View full review »
SL
Manager, Data Center at a non-profit with 501-1,000 employees

We looked a EMC before Dell purchased them. Cost is what made us decide on HPE, plus we had a relationship with HPE. We have always been a big HPE shop. Otherwise, the products were apples to apples.

View full review »
SS
Director Of Information Technology at Jacobsen Construction Company, Inc.

Nimble. At the time, Nimble wasn't an HPE company.

View full review »
it_user680223 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Tech Engineer at St Charles health

We looked at Dell, EMC and Pure Storage. However, HPE was the only one that provided the flat SAN solution that we wanted for those remote locations.

The important factor while selecting a vendor is the range of products for the solution in terms of the issue that I'm trying to fill. Also, how the vendors support their products and the price are other crucial factors that we look at before selecting a vendor.

View full review »
it_user567555 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director at Lanware

We have looked at EMC as an alternative to HPE 3PAR, but in terms of servers and storage, we are very much aligned with HPE and have been for over 20 years, so there are a lot of reasons why we use them.

One of the reasons we selected 3PAR was a similar reason that HP first acquired 3PAR: It's used by the world's biggest service and cloud providers. They're particularly focused on the multitenancy elements. It provides virtual domain technology that allows you to securely separate different customers' environments and where they store that data. You basically create multiple virtual SANs within a SAN. For a service provider who's doing multitenancy, clearly that's a big advantage for us.

The most important criteria when selecting 3PAR was the multitenancy piece, because we get a lot of questions from our clients around how we securely segment their data; if we can prove to them that our administrators can only log into their specific domain within that shared storage system and we can provide an audit trail.

View full review »
it_user567642 - PeerSpot reviewer
Broadcasting Technologist at a media company with 10,001+ employees

We considered Dell before HPE. We chose HPE due to its reputation. We had a relationship with HPE previously, and actually they were able to come in and recommend, and actually spend time with us to sit down and ask what our needs were, analyze, project and give us both sets of figures of what we need, how quickly to fulfill them, how long it would take, and that sort of thing. They were able to come in and do this. Other vendors really just tell us, "Here's what you'd like." That certainly won't do as we need to have some details in pre-sales. This solution does fit our needs very well. It is flexible, and we get good support with it. It's stable, and it works, and so I'm happy with it.

View full review »
it_user285342 - PeerSpot reviewer
Group CEO at LayerX Group

Other than HP, we've been talking to, I wouldn't say working with, but we've been talking to both Cisco and Dell, more so with Dell over the years. But we've really failed to engage to the level that we have with HP. HP have always been incredibly engaging, incredibly communicative, with regards to not only the product sets that are available, where they're going. And the entire ecosystem around these product sets is really what adds to the ultimate value. Anybody can buy a hard drive and stick it in a machine, but, you know, being able to support that long term, understand where that technology needs to go, and then get it there.

View full review »
TZ
IT Infrastructure Manager at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees

We did evaluate other vendors originally. We looked at Dell EMC and all the competitors in the market. We chose HPE because they had the best technology and performance.

We have had a very good experience with 3PAR, so we will probably not be looking at different vendors or solutions.

View full review »
it_user684996 - PeerSpot reviewer
Operations Manager at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

Our arrays were getting on the older side. The new array fits in with our existing infrastructure very well. We have a great history with HPE support and it wasn't a difficult sell. We did look at other options, but in reality, because of the long-standing great relationship and outstanding support, we went with HPE.

View full review »
it_user252618 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enterprise Systems Administrator at a agriculture with 1,001-5,000 employees

We looked at Dell, HP, NetApp, and EMC. There are two big reasons why we chose HP:

  1. The 3PAR product is a lot easier to administer because it’s a virtual storage that aggregates all the disks together; and
  2. There were two virtual products for what we were looking for, but we liked what it did in terms of optimization better than Dell.
View full review »
it_user230487 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Administrator at ProCredit Bank

As I mentioned above, we had five or six vendor companies for storage. This was NetApp, EMC, IBM, HP, etc. We chose HP as the technology it has, had no real competitors at that time. Also the price was great!

View full review »
DB
Network Manager at a manufacturing company with 501-1,000 employees

We looked at Dell's competing product. This is prior to them buying EMC. We looked at Compellent. We also looked at EMC and Pure Storage. 

We bought EqualLogic before Dell bought it. After Dell bought it, some things changed. Now I am afraid of buying a small player that might get purchased and the story changes. Therefore, we thought HPE is a very stable partner. Nobody will buy HPE. We can go ahead and trust that it will be a stable, supported product for the foreseeable future.

View full review »
it_user685005 - PeerSpot reviewer
Consulting Manager

We talked to Dell and EMC. We decided upon HPE because the partner with whom we worked hand-in-hand had been working with them for many years.

View full review »
it_user568014 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Systems Manager at City Electrical Factors

We looked at IBM, Dell, and HPE. We went with HPE because we have used HPE storage solutions before. We have also used HPE network server equipment and we found them to be good quality equipment. Additionally, we found that working with them was quite a good experience.

View full review »
it_user364635 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior IT Engineer with 1,001-5,000 employees

We looked at EMC, Nimble, and Pure Storage, but 3PAR is the market leader.

View full review »
JA
Systems Architect at The University of Auckland

We went through a very exhaustive testing environment and selection process to make sure we were getting the best platform to support our metro storage cluster. We have achieved all the goals we've set out to attempt, so I can say with some confidence that it is a carrier grade class piece of storage and from the point where we put it in we've run without fault, without outage and we're very pleased with them at the moment.

View full review »
it_user229380 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Engineer at a tech consulting company with 51-200 employees
  • DDN
  • EMC
  • Isilon
View full review »
it_user225402 - PeerSpot reviewer
Server and Storage Practice Lead at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
it_user183474 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior System Engineer with 1,001-5,000 employees

Yes, comparable systems from Dell, EMC and Hitachi.

View full review »
EJ
HP-UX System Admin at L3 Technologies Inc

We evaluated Dell EMC, HPE, and some other competitors. We went with HPE because of the price point.

View full review »
SA
Systems Engineer at a leisure / travel company with 10,001+ employees

I have used a number of different storage solutions, and the HPE products are probably the best from an ease of use and administrative standpoint. 

View full review »
WW
Systems Architect at Greenville Health Systems

We did evaluate other solutions. We chose 3PAR because of the converge system, the all in one solution.

View full review »
it_user582870 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enterprise Infrastructure Architect at loanDepot

I evaluated Pure Storage before choosing.

View full review »
it_user485712 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Datacenter Specialist at a aerospace/defense firm with 10,001+ employees

We have looked at various competitors, and we have swung away from HPE storage, and then back into HPE storage as well. We were looking at EMC for a while, we actually had some BMCs in our environment as well. Right now, they are running alongside our 3PARs, we do actually want multi-vendor storage for their environment, depending on what the demands are for the storage. We treat our 3PARs as our tier two storage.

View full review »
CS
Systems Engineer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We are an HPE shop. Everything that we have is HPE, so we just stuck with them. We have never been upset with HPE. They have been phenomenal, in my opinion.

View full review »
it_user252609 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Network Engineer at Colonial Savings

We looked at two other vendors. One was Compellent and one was EMC. Through our research and talking to various companies that were already using 3PAR, it was determined to be the better product.

When selecting a product, reliability and support are the most important requirements.

View full review »
it_user471384 - PeerSpot reviewer
CIO at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees

In most cases Pure Storage is better. It's better overall, and allows us to scale up faster, the cost of ownership's lower, and the replication across areas is good. 3PAR is not bad either, but Pure Storage is just more competitive.

View full review »
HG
Director, Systems & Architecture at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We evaluated Nexsan. However, we wanted to stay with HPE.

View full review »
CR
Director Technology Infrastructure at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

As far as I know, we had three vendors on our short-list: HPE, EMC, and a third vendor I don't recall at the moment.

View full review »
it_user683205 - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Architect at a university with 10,001+ employees

Traditionally, we were using NetApp. We did look at IBM, Lenovo, Nimble and all of them. Actually, Nimble didn't come to the table, they missed it; so IBM, Lenovo, and Dell are the solutions we looked at.

They missed the thing, it's hard to describe because earlier we used to strongly believe strongly in just using NFS for ESX since it was easier to manage. However, with SSDs, NFS actually puts in a little bit of latency in it because you have to change that protocol thing. When we wrote the IRP, we made sure that everybody could reply and I think they missed it. There was some sort of miscommunication, so basically, everybody was on that chart.

When we are looking at a vendor, it's a mixture of everything. Basically, for our IRP, the feedback from the vendors was good, this is our problem how would you solve it. These are mandatory and minimum requirements whilst selecting a vendor, these are highly desirable, and we broke it all down so that they could fill it all in. The feedback was good, it was easy to fill out but there were somethings that some players could do. Veeam was big and we use them for all our stuff, but not everybody integrates with Veeam. The alerting capacity planning and all those things were a big thing for us too.

View full review »
it_user693831 - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Manager at a government with 11-50 employees

Other systems evaluated were Dell EqualLogic, Hitachi, IBM, Netapp.

View full review »
it_user567990 - PeerSpot reviewer
Category Manager at a government with 501-1,000 employees

We looked at Dell EMC and HPE. We chose HPE because of the product portfolio that they keep alive and evaluate and improve. The one we chose includes all the features and capabilities that the company makes.

View full review »
it_user334911 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Unix Administrator at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We have evaluated other vendors over the years, but we have stayed with HP due to the high reliability and ease of use.

View full review »
it_user285333 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director, IT Services at University of Auckland

It needed to fit into our current infrastructure. We needed to make sure that whatever we put in place had as minimal effort required regarding staff work load. We wanted to make sure that it didn't need any manual intervention in order to failover. The peer persistence that the 3PAR has was also important to us to make sure that we had replicated data, and we could access it quickly and easily. Recovering quickly and little data loss were the most important things to us. We had a few vendors on our short list. The reason we chose HP was it fitted those criteria very well. I would rate the 3PAR system fairly highly because it met our requirements of what we needed at the time. We're quite comfortable using it. We're seeing less stress from teams around issues that we have had in the past.

View full review »
GP
IT Manager at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees

We looked at NetApp. We also evaluated hyperconverged solutions like Nutanix, but it was not relevant at the time. And we were approached by HPE regarding SimpliVity but it was not relevant as well, at the time.

We went with 3PAR because, at the time, we were convinced that this would provide us the solution that we need, from several KPIs that we were looking at. We were promised performance that we didn't get in the end.

View full review »
DS
Infrastructure Analysts at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

We did not look at other vendors beside HPE. We were one of the first adopters of 3PAR. We had one of the old T800s. We were early in the adoption of HP 3PAR.

Management made a decision to go with 3PAR, because HPE came and made it appealing.

View full review »
MM
Assistance Administrator with 11-50 employees

Our organization issued us an HPE 3PAR. There really wasn't any market research with other vendors.

View full review »
JP
Sr Engineer at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees

Our organization already had an established relationship with HPE so, in this particular case, we weren't in a position to shop this piece of the solution around. We stuck with HPE after making the other decisions.

View full review »
it_user784065 - PeerSpot reviewer
Product Engineer at a media company with 10,001+ employees

We didn't so much evaluate other vendors. For different types of workloads we're looking at some open source solutions like Gluster, Ceph. There are a couple of other options we've looked at.

View full review »
it_user784023 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Specialist

We were looking at competitive product just from a financial point of view to have multiple quotations. So, that is why we looked at a different vendor, but as an IT team, we had 3PAR and HPE on the mind already.

View full review »
it_user567792 - PeerSpot reviewer
HPE Alliance Manager

We have not looked at other vendors because we are very happy with HPE. We are currently looking to upgrade within HPE.

View full review »
it_user567876 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT System admin at Imeldaziekenhuis vzw

We tried Fujitsu and NetApp.

Support is the most important factor to us when selecting a vendor.

View full review »
it_user567777 - PeerSpot reviewer
ICT System Engineer at Universitätsspital Zürich

I don't know if other vendors were evaluated. It was before my time. But, there are still better products. I would like to have an HPE XP7.

View full review »
it_user567732 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at Turku PET Centre

We didn't consider any other vendors because we did an upgrade from old HPE hardware. We can trust it. The whole process works very smoothly. No downtime; that is important for us.

View full review »
it_user567666 - PeerSpot reviewer
Connect Germany at Westfälische Wilhelms-University

We looked at all the major competitors at the time when we chose it. We looked at the EMCs, the NetApps, the IBMs, and the Dells. In the end, it turned out only one, namely HPE, not only for storage but also for server and all the other requirements we had, was able to bring it to the market at a price point that we were willing to pay. For the 3PAR, of course, the transparency between sites is valuable. That used to be the huge feature for NetApp. At that time, they weren't able to deliver it in the way we wanted it. Also HPE had to wait about half a year to be able to deliver that. It was just a software update, some more setup, and then we were up and running. I think with NetApp, it would have been little bit of a harder journey.

View full review »
it_user370125 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Global Engineering Computing at Siemens

We didn't evaluate other options because we've been with HP for many years now. We have 25 locations worldwide and we needed a global flash-storage solution. HP, also a global company, was the right fit.

View full review »
it_user285357 - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Manager at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We ended up with EMC. We had the 3PAR guys on there. Overall, I think it was the best solution for us.

View full review »
DN
Engineering Services Manager at Muckleshoot

We considered NetApp, EMC, and Dell. 3PAR came out on top.

View full review »
JS
Infrastructure Engineer at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees

We talked with EMC a little bit, but it was decided pretty quickly that we were going with the HPE solution. We looked at the environment holistically, and we weren't just looking at we replacing storage. We thought, "How are we going to do storage, compute, and networking, then what will it look like?" Then, we chose to partner with HPE rather than just go with a one off here and there.

View full review »
it_user784104 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Systems Analyst

We thought about EMC. But as I mentioned, in terms of integration and compatibility, 3PAR was better because we have EVA. To migrate from EVA to 3PAR with 3PAR is zero downtime migration, and with EMC, it was little bit complex. That is why, we did not want to risk it.

View full review »
it_user784020 - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Engineer at Ajman

We did an evaluation comparing it with the EMC, and we determined that it's better to go ahead with this.

View full review »
it_user539658 - PeerSpot reviewer
Researcher

Yes, Tintri T850, but at the time of the PoC the solutions provided by Tintri were not scalable enough for future demands.

View full review »
it_user680301 - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Admin at a computer software company with 51-200 employees

We've looked at Dell, but we've always been an HPE shop. We don't really have any plans of changing that.

View full review »
it_user567951 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Infrastructure Lead at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

I looked at things like Tintri and another company that I forget the name of now. They didn't have the support model that I needed at the time.

View full review »
it_user469275 - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Digital Officer, Director at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees

It really came down to relationships. At the time it wasn't just going from EMC, it was also going from Cisco to HPE Networking. We went through a pretty good process, where we talked about our needs and requirements, and also comfort levels of technology change. Some of my engineers were a little reluctant to move away from Cisco. But HPE came and sat down and just said "We'll do whatever it takes. What do you need? What are your concerns?" Just worked with us in real detail: able to understand what our concerns were, where we were going, and making sure that the engineers were made comfortable. But also making sure, which was the last part which comes across the line, was that the technology was what we needed, was enough for growth. Whereas Cisco was just a "here's a quote, sent it to us" which I think for me swung me over to HP. The commitment to the customer.

View full review »
it_user362307 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Server Engineer/Service Owner at a tech vendor with 501-1,000 employees

We evaluated Hitachi and we chose HP because of the price and ease-of-use.

View full review »
it_user289656 - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Engineer at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
  • Dell Compellant
  • EMC VMX
View full review »
it_user251226 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Storage, Virtualization, and DR Engineer at a legal firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

Major players, such as EMC. We felt HP was a better fit. We weighed it out and HP fit our needs better than EMC.

View full review »
it_user252639 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Systems Engineer - Storage and Virtualization at a legal firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

We also looked at BMC.

View full review »
it_user231912 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior System Administrator at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees

We also looked at EMC but 3PAR was the cheaper solution, and it was more flexible.

View full review »
it_user229374 - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Systems & Security Admin at a legal firm with 501-1,000 employees

Yes, we looked at several presentations.

View full review »
JD
Director at a non-profit with 51-200 employees

Nimble. We went with 3PAR because we got a special deal on pricing.

View full review »
KB
Storage Service Architect at NNIT

We always channel all our vendors whether it is HPE or some others. Price is one of the most important features, but functionalities, availability, and the scalability of the systems is also very important.

View full review »
it_user679263 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sales Channel Manager at Portenntum

We didn't evaluate any other solutions besides HPE.

View full review »
it_user680190 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Admin at a insurance company with 501-1,000 employees

We did look at Hitachi and they were a close second to HPE. However, it was just that, we were more familiar with HPE because we already had some of their C-Class Blades.

Manageability is an important criterion while selecting a vendor. Also, for system administrators like myself, it is important to be able to understand the solution right off the bat.

View full review »
it_user567900 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Architect at Bolagsverket

We made an RFP that was open to everyone. We evaluated an old flash solution that was better than the traditional solution; but you can't buy an old flash solution if you're going to buy as big as a traditional solution. So you have to have the optimizations that 3PAR has. Otherwise, you're not in business. It gets too expensive.

We had offers from EMC and from IBM, but our HPE partner came up with the best offer, so they won the RFP.

View full review »
it_user567729 - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Analyst at Turku PET Centre

Our shortlist of vendors including Fujitsu. We have something from them. However, I think it benefits us the most when we stick with one vendor, which is HPE. We try to stick with HPE and HPE tools.

View full review »
it_user471405 - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Advisor - IT Service Management (ITSM) at a logistics company with 10,001+ employees

They give us the storage requirements and then we coordinate with the teams to do it. As far as competition I don't get involved.

View full review »
it_user252609 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Network Engineer at Colonial Savings

We looked at EMC and HP. 3PAR is using some very high quality software, so we chose HP. Dreamworks uses HP, so we figured it would do us just fine.

View full review »
it_user193209 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT-Consultant with 1,001-5,000 employees

As an IT consultant, it’s my job to compare different storage solutions. Many of our customers want our consultation where I evaluate and recommend different products depending on the business needs and demands. The other products that usually come in play are Dell, EMC, and NetApp. I’ve also seen some evaluations on a “new” storage manufacturer, Tintri.

View full review »
it_user229389 - PeerSpot reviewer
Solution Architect with 51-200 employees

We compared EMC and IBM, but both cost more and lacked key space and performance features.

View full review »
it_user783987 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at a legal firm with 501-1,000 employees

We did try a few other vendors during a trial period. We simulated failovers just for fun, just to see how quickly they respond. Some of them had issues getting parts to us immediately.

View full review »
it_user680214 - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Server Admin at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We had looked at Pure Storage , Hitachi , and a couple others. However, 3PAR gave us the best bang for the buck.

View full review »
it_user567840 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at Rádio Renascença

We compared it with other products outside of HPE such as EMC CLARiiON. We chose 3PAR because it's a good product.

The most important criteria when selecting a vendor is the way that we can negotiate things. It's very important for us.

View full review »
it_user188622 - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Manager / Administrator at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

Yes, we compared this series to the EMC VNX series based on feature/performance/technology and cost.

View full review »
it_user187794 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director, Midwest Cloud Consulting at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

The usual EMC stuff.

View full review »
TC
Computer Systems Administrator at a sports company with 501-1,000 employees

I would recommend looking at Nimble instead. It is a similar option and something that we are looking at now, though 3PAR has been a pretty solid product.

View full review »
GM
Manager Lab Operations at a tech vendor with 5,001-10,000 employees

We looked at NetApp, Hitachi.

View full review »
SS
Data center team lead at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We also evaluated Pure Storage but we wanted to stick with one vendor.

View full review »
it_user694674 - PeerSpot reviewer
Storage specialist, Infrastructure Architect with 1,001-5,000 employees

We evaluated some of the EMC products and NetApp was being looked at.

View full review »
it_user680229 - PeerSpot reviewer
Wintel Engineer at a non-tech company with 10,001+ employees

We looked at other solutions such as HPE and Hitachi.
The most important criteria while selecting a vendor are if it is user-friendly, the support provided and cost.

View full review »
it_user567699 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Engineer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We were obliged to look into other vendors; but we tried not to leave HPE because we have many years of experience with them.

View full review »
it_user567906 - PeerSpot reviewer
Department head Data AOS with 1,001-5,000 employees

We looked at some of the bigger vendors like Dell EMC and IBM, of course.

View full review »
it_user568020 - PeerSpot reviewer
Bankprokurist at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees

We didn’t have an alternative at the time. Our client could only work with 3PAR. There were no other products in the world which could do that in 2012. I don't know about solutions that are available today.

View full review »
it_user229383 - PeerSpot reviewer
Solutions Architect - EMC at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

We also looked at EMC and IBM array’s in the same class, but 3PAR was a better value for money with what they were able to offer.

View full review »
it_user427308 - PeerSpot reviewer
Data Center Manager

We have compared a lot of vendors and this was the best solution for us. We were running it when it was originally 3PAR and was not merged with HPE. 

We are very happy with the solution.

View full review »
it_user370131 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of IT Architecture at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees

We did evaluate other options as we were going through a third-party supplier, but I can't recall specifically which other vendors we considered.

View full review »
AJ
Solutions Architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

I have compared HPE 3PAR with NetApp, they have a monopoly over the NAS and can handle NAS very well. 

View full review »
it_user253320 - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Systems Engineer with 1,001-5,000 employees

We also looked at EMC.

View full review »
it_user684999 - PeerSpot reviewer
Storage Engineer at Syniverse

Since we're an EMC shop, we test a lot of stuff.

View full review »
it_user187086 - PeerSpot reviewer
Associate Infrastructure Manager at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

We considered an EMC VNX as well as an IBM XIV.

View full review »
it_user680334 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We looked at Dell and Lenovo.

When selecting a vendor, we look for the presence in Central America. They should have offices in Central America.

View full review »
it_user568047 - PeerSpot reviewer
Storage Engineer Architect at PeerSpot

We received four replies on the RFP, and HPE beat them all in terms of price.

View full review »
it_user229377 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. San and Storage Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

We also evaluated EMC.

View full review »
it_user203880 - PeerSpot reviewer
Solutions Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

We also looked at EMC and PURE.

View full review »
CB
Assistant Manager of Infrastructure at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees

HPE is the preferred solution for our company.

View full review »
it_user662934 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head - IT, Product Engineering & Service Delivery

We evaluated the NetApp solution.

View full review »
it_user567591 - PeerSpot reviewer
Section Manager at a government with 501-1,000 employees

My organization is a government authority, so we issue requirements and solutions, and the best price wins, when comparing the functions. Any company offering this type of enterprise flash array storage solution in Sweden could have made a bid.

View full review »
it_user364536 - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Specialist VMware/Server with 1,001-5,000 employees
  • EMC
  • NetApp
  • Whiptail

The storage team tech lead chose HP over these.

View full review »
it_user215859 - PeerSpot reviewer
Team Lead for Infrastructure at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees

I wasn't part of that effort at the time, so I can't comment.

View full review »
it_user229386 - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Administrator at a healthcare company with 501-1,000 employees

We also looked at EMC storage.

View full review »
it_user225660 - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Integrator - VMWare, Cisco, EMC & HP. with 501-1,000 employees
it_user645615 - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at Jadeh Abrisham Rayaneh

Any action we want to do with a Dell EMC product needs a license. But with 3PAR's converged solution, at least there is no need to purchase more licenses to get all the features that we need. We can get basic and mid-range features without licenses. But for simple activities with Dell EMC, we need a license. Also, HPE is simpler than Dell EMC for the end-user.

View full review »
it_user368739 - PeerSpot reviewer
Integrator at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

I still use Dell. We also looked at EMC.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
All-Flash Storage
March 2024
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Dell Technologies, NetApp and others in All-Flash Storage. Updated: March 2024.
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.