HPE 3PAR Flash Storage Previous Solutions

Jeff Stone
Solutions Architect at Optio Data
It is the availability aspect. Over the last few years, I have done a lot of shifts where people come off of Dell, Hitachi arrays, or even some other products within the HPE line, and they need either the performance or the availability. The availability that they want to put in is a lot of time a type of Peer Persistence setup. We are selling at least two 3PARS where they have multiple data centers, so if an array goes down in the same data center, the customer can lose a whole array and still stay up because they have peer persistence set up. That has probably been the single biggest selling feature: availability. Nobody wants to be the person in the news that is down or costing their shareholders money. Thus, availability has been a real big push, and 3PAR does availability really well. View full review »
Wayne Cross
Director IT Security and Infrastructure at a legal firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
The existing solution that we had was getting to end-of-life. And the workloads that we had on it were driving the IOPS through the roof. Everything was slowing down. We knew we needed a solution that would take us through at least the next five or six years. We really didn't know where the business was going and some of the things that it was going to do. We needed a solution that could guarantee us that level of performance. With any vendor, your platform is as good as the support. And traditionally, with HPE, we have had good support on the service side. And with 3PAR we have actually had better support compared to what we had before on the EVAs, the older version of the platform. In terms of the most important criteria when evaluating a vendor: * support is very important to us * the kind of relationship that we think we will have with the vendor * our relationships with account managers. And the reason those relationships are important is that we really can't deal with a buy-it-and-forget-it type of vendor. Even though you might spend less money to get the platform in, when you have a buy-it-and-forget-it vendor and you need to strategize, there is nobody there to help you to strategize. If you can't find the account manager, you don't know the direction that the organization is going. It's like you buy something and then you just drop into a black hole. So it's important for us to work with a vendor who will work with us. When you buy a platform like a storage array, it's seven years. You have to have some strategy over the seven years. By year three or year four you want to know what you should do. Do I buy the next version? Instead of one platform, they now have six platforms. Where do they fit? So that kind of interaction is important to us. So we are looking for vendors that we think we can work with. And price is also important. At the end of the day, even though HPE makes a good platform we still have to hold them accountable and make sure that they are working within the price range of their competitors. Features are important too. We were looking at a platform that would enable us to maximize our investment. Features like deduplication and tiering were an important part of our platform as well, the ability to move workloads from one tier to the next and to automate that using AO. In addition, features like replication, because we have our primary data center and our backup data center. And then, we're a highly virtualized environment so we needed a platform a storage platform that would be advantageous in that environment; one that would give us a better deduplication ratio built into the platform. View full review »
Dallas Widing
IT Manager at BouMatic LLC
I told the company that they needed to invest in 3PAR. They had one IBM DS 5600, a SAN that was huge, but was only eight terabytes, at the time. They were trying to go with the two LeftHand SANs to replace the IBM, but the LeftHand SANs IOPS could never succeed the IOPS from the IBM SAN. Then, the reseller that was helping them was let go and new management was brought in. That management decided to outsource IT to the company that I worked for. I was a huge HPE partner at the time. 3PAR has increased our performance over our old IBM SAN that was put in around 2009, prior to my time, which was 1G fiber and all SAS drives. The performance of the 3PAR, with its SSDs and controller nodes, was vastly superior to that older IBM. The HPE LeftHand SANs were all SAS and SATA, so the 3PAR SSD performance was just off the charts. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Dell EMC, NetApp and others in All-Flash Storage Arrays. Updated: February 2020.
407,096 professionals have used our research since 2012.
ITManagec405
IT Manager at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees
From a technical perspective, we understood the benefits of having centralized storage. From that point on we looked for what was supposed to be the right solution for us. Eventually, we zeroed in on the 3PAR solution and not the competition. View full review »
Leonardo Amarello
System Engineer at NV GEBE
For the solution that we were looking at an ERP system, and what we need to do with it, 3PAR was one of the best. On top of that, the company used to use another product called, LeftHand. After LeftHand, we moved over to 3PAR. When I saw the performance from LeftHand compared to 3PAR, it was a very good improvement and the way to go. Speed is what we are all looking for right now. Before, people could wait for data, but now, the moment they wait five minutes, and are not typing, that's the minute they say the system is down. In the past, we used to have a different way of storing data. Since we moved over to the 3PAR, where we have two different sizes, the replication and accessibility are much faster. View full review »
Infrastr6155
Infrastructure Engineer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We went from an old XP24k, a long time ago, to an EMC VNX. The EMC storage was cheap on the front-end but expensive on the back-end for maintaining it. It was cheaper for us to jump into another 3PAR than it was to maintain support on the VNX. We quickly moved to 3PAR and we haven't looked back since. In terms of important criteria in selecting a vendor besides price, we're primarily an HPE shop. I can count on one hand how many other pieces of hardware we have other than HPE: a Palo Alto firewall and maybe a couple of vendor-supplied Dell boxes. I always look to HPE first. If they can't do it, I call and complain to my regional sales VP and he tries his best. Sometimes he can pull one out and get something going for me, but if not then I start looking at others. View full review »
NetworkAd9ed
Network Admin at a healthcare company with 501-1,000 employees
The previous solution that we had was about 10 years old. It was an HPE Generation 6 server. We had some management changes, and it was time for a refresh which we hadn't done in many years. View full review »
Dwayne Vidi
Director of Technology at a university
We used to have a Dell EqualLogic storage system prior to this one. On the phone, with support, they managed to tell us to do something that caused the whole system to come down. That was one of the determining factors to go completely away from anything Dell had their hands in and go with something else. In our research, as much as I tried to look on the web to find anything negative about 3PAR, I couldn't find it. I found negatives about every other storage system we could find, but not on the 3PAR. Among the most important criteria for us when evaluating a vendor is support. Support is always a concern. We don't have that many IT staff, so we do rely on vendor support and we usually keep the maintenance up on all of all our main equipment. So having a decent support relationship with vendors is critical. View full review »
ITInfrasbaa1
IT Infrastructure Manager at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees
We previously used a number of small servers with disks attached to it, distributed all over to data centers. This was absolutely not effective and terrible. We had quite obsolete infrastructure. We were thinking about whether we should just upgrade it a little bit or if we should take a different path. At that time, a few years ago, 3PAR for us was a change to a very different type of storage. Today, I would say that it is standard. However, at that time, it was a change. We wanted to improve and start doing things differently. In general, at the time, 3PAR was from today's perspective, like implementing AI over our whole infrastructure. It was a giant leap forward. View full review »
Mark Frenette
HPC Architect at Nuance Communications
We had the MSA P2000 series previously. We had 120 of them in one data center. Therefore, we went from the MSAs to the 3PAR, and the decision-making was based on the performance. Our issues was neither a throughput nor an IOP problem, but more of a file open issue. We have billions of files where you need a lot of different spindles with different heads moving around independently of each other. 3PAR provided this for us. View full review »
GlobalMa4cee
Global manager, servers and storage at a software R&D company with 201-500 employees
About eight years ago, we had a bunch of different storage platforms, and we actually went through a proof of concept and selected 3PAR. Our company was expanding. We realized that our data footprint was going to grow massively in the next few years. We're a game developer so our data growth is completely mirrored by the hardware that we make our games on. At the time, we knew that there were new versions of PlayStation, Xbox 4K coming out for TV, so all of our assets just blew up, about 20 times the size. We realized we needed to invest in an enterprise-grade solution. We looked at three or four different companies. Then, we rolled out the F400 series. The factors we considered were the normal things: Obviously, cost per terabyte or gigabyte, performance, IOPS; scalability was a massive factor as well. We knew that we were going to grow and we needed to be able to just add shelves of disks or add SSD, add SaaS or add Nearline. View full review »
Solution7c6e
Solutions Architect
I needed to invest in a new solution because the previous solution was getting old. We wanted to go to market to find a better solution. We wanted something that had a little more intelligence. However, because we are a semi-public company, we had to go to market. We could not just pick 3PAR. The 3PAR actually had to prove itself. It had to be scored and graded across a panel of people in order to win the bid. Not only that, it had to have a good price. View full review »
ITManage04a2
IT Manager at a energy/utilities company
We start of with the EVAs, and as the EVAs aged out, we were moving up. However, it was the EVA that failed on us and 3PAR was just the next, better solution for our scale of need. View full review »
ProjectD7fc0
Project Development Engineer at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Most of my projects are large P3 (public-private partnership) projects, where we do design, build, and maintenance of a facility for up to 20 to 25 years. We then return it to the client with another 10 years of service. So, upfront, I have to decide what solutions to put in there that will give me the minimal refresh over a longer period of time. I have to weigh the pros and cons of how much I spend upfront and what my maintenance cost will be over time. That's where the 3PAR solution is a good solution for me. It gives me fewer refreshes over a period of time and yet, at the end of the contract, I can still return it to the client with another 10 years of service. My clients rely on me for evaluating vendors. One of the things I do is take the data sheets from multiple suppliers, compare them, see what is the best fit for the client and then, of course, use my own judgment and experience with my other clients on the given product. Fortunately, 3PAR has been a good product, so, I have no hesitation in recommending it and moving forward with it. View full review »
Brian-Earnst
Enterprise Architect at Blessing Health Systems
3PAR was quite a bit less money than EMC, and that was one of the deciding factors. We switched because of the cost and 3PAR's four-node system, because they said we should get more throughput from the four-node system, since EMC is a two-node system. View full review »
Director609e
Director Technology Infrastructure at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
We had a set of vendors come in and do proofs of concept to help us better understand what options and features were available. Based upon what we found with HPE and 3PAR - I wasn't actually a part of the initial assessment, this is all stuff that I heard when I came on board - it just was the best solution for us at the time. View full review »
SrEngine483a
Sr Engineer at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
We were in a position where we could reinvent our wheel. We had an older, aging architecture and we needed to update. So, as much as it is a replacement and an upgrade from our existing equipment, it is also brand new. It's a complete transition from where we were to this. It's hard to look at it as a transition when there is that much stark difference. When we get over to it, there's going to be a clear benefit upgrading from what our legacy networks and servers are. When evaluating a vendor our criteria include * price * customer service * quality of the technology * whether or not it can serve our needs. View full review »
NetworkM17fa
Network Manager at a manufacturing company with 501-1,000 employees
We are using Tableau, and it is a heavy thing, especially when you start calling in a lot of data sources. At our old storage, it was iSCSI connected and not adequately responsive. Therefore, they had to trim down the searches, and as a result, they were getting less insight. Now, they get everything they want and in a timely manner. We were using Dell EqualLogic. The load from our VMware (when we first put it in was fine) had gone from approximately 20 virtual machines to 150 virtual machines on the same storage. The storage load had increased so drastically that we just could not keep up with it, so we looked at different things. I mentioned 3PAR is an excellent enterprise cost product. We switched because noticed there was a lag in our previous storage, then went ahead and got 3PAR. View full review »
WayneCross
Director IT at Borden Ladner
We previously used HPE. We had to upgrade because our previous platform was end of life. View full review »
SystemsE33b6
Systems Engineer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
My old 3PAR is end of life, so it is time to switch. View full review »
Julie Imoto
Engineering Manager at Leidos Holdings Inc.
We've had a long-standing working relationship with HPE. They're a trusted solution, so we've continued working with them. View full review »
Steve Davidek
IT Manager at City Of Sparks
When we knew we were at end-of-life. I have a product lifecycle that I keep track of, how long I want to keep things. We knew that our HPE EVA was running long enough that we really needed to replace it. I was looking, I got some ideas from our vendor - from HPE - on what solutions there were to replace it. We were able to cut our power consumption by 80 percent. We're very happy with 3PAR. In selecting a vendor what was important to us were ease of use, that it was easy to transfer the current data without a lot of trouble, and it was. It was really easy. It was moved and it was done. View full review »
Infrastrd82a
Infrastructure Engineer at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
We were using HPE EVA before and the solution had been in place for like six years at that point, so it was ageing, we're limited on what we could do with it. So, it was time to switch over to something that was newer, had better features. View full review »
ServerAnae40
Server Analyst at a K-12 educational company or school with 51-200 employees
Previously, we had all sorts of different storage arrays, e.g., the MSAs, which are also from HPE. We also had just servers with hard drives in them scattered around everywhere. Now, we have centralized everything onto the 3PAR arrays. View full review »
Infrastrb292
Infrastructure Analysts at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
At the time, we needed a better solution than our previous solution (Dell EMC) for storage, so we looked to HPE. View full review »
RajeshSrinivasan
Director at HCL Technologies
We help our customers decide on purchasing new solutions. This is our process: * We have a headroom of about 20 to 30 percentage depending on the customer's business. The visibility for the next year on the future annual growth. * Once we hit a headroom of about 60 percentage, we talk to the customer and tell them that they are up for either scalability, compression, or dedupe for their data. * When the capacity hits about 80 percentage, then we buy a new product and app. View full review »
Scott Samowitz
Director Of Information Technology at Jacobsen Construction
Our main reason for switching was based on age. We weren't having major issues with our storage, but we try and replace things on a five-year schedule, at that level. When selecting a vendor the biggest factor is a vendor we know. In the past, we had used one that seemed to be leading edge. I had a guy on the financial side that was pushing more for that. He really liked how that vendor didn't require you to purchase their drives. You could use off-the-shelf, enterprise-rated drives, so the costs of expanding the array seemed to be cheaper going that way. But after two years that company went belly-up and disappeared. This time, even though there were a couple other vendors he liked better - Nimble was actually one of them at the time, but they were still new enough that I pushed back - I said, "Nope. I'm going with somebody whose name I know." View full review »
Dale Nelson
Solutions Architect at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
I have gone the gamut of old EMC arrays, Clarion arrays, and XP arrays, and 3PAR is just so simple. View full review »
DataCentc0ab
Data center team lead at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
The switch was based on that fact that we're on a lease-refresh cycle. That is what really drives this kind of change, for our business. Our main criteria in selecting a vendor include stability, that is a big one. What really drove us towards 3PAR was having just one vendor; having HPE as both our server and our storage versus HPE for server alone. View full review »
Principa0182
Principal Engineer at a tech consulting company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We previously used EMC VMAX. When I was at Level 3 Communications eight years ago, we were one of the first customers of 3PAR before HPE bought them. We did a PoC, and it literally made the others in the race look bad. It was that good. View full review »
SanAndStd11c
SAN and Storage Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
I had looked at 3PAR before HPE bought it. Then, when HPE bought it, that solidified the decision - that they had the backing of such a big organization. But the biggest factors were the features and functionality, how the hardware worked. And Adaptive Optimization was something we were really wanting. View full review »
SrStorag7e72
Sr. Storage Architect at a manufacturing company with 5,001-10,000 employees
We had HPE EVA storage. We switched because all of it was legacy storage. We migrated from legacy storage to the new 3PAR. The main reason we went with HPE was the migration from the old legacy to the new 3PAR was very seamless. They have Peer Motion integration so the data migration was easy. If we had gone with another vendor we would have had to do an offline migration. When it comes to selecting a vendor, HPE is our business partner so we use their products. View full review »
SystemsAd3f7
Systems And Storage Architect at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We were look for a refresh. At the time, IBM was not keeping up with their VMware integration, especially with VVols. It was quite obvious that HPE was a leader in it, and this steered us into looking at them. Then, we found out that the product could do everything we needed it to do. View full review »
ManagerD1d2a
Manager, Data Center at a non-profit with 501-1,000 employees
We had HPE EVAs. Then, we had to move away from EVAs, and the 3PARs were the next ones in the line. View full review »
SrEngine62c7
Sr. Engineer at a leisure / travel company
We previously had Dell Compellent. We switched because we were using HPE Compute and HPE Blades, and it seemed like we might as well go all in on HPE. Also, we were not getting what we thought we wanted for performance out of Compellent. View full review »
Herve Garcia
Director, Systems & Architecture at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We were previously using multiple vendors. We switched to 3PAR for more performance, reliability, and we had challenges with MSAs (low-end storage). View full review »
Directora818
Director of North America at a sports company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Prior to implementing this solution we were using one by Dell. We were not meeting our commitments to customers because it was not meeting our performance requirements. We had a lot of legacy hardware in our environment, and the step into the future by implementing this solution has been fantastic. View full review »
Marty Riedling
Systems Engineer Manager at Ingles Markets, Incorporated
We were running out of capacity on our 3PAR 7200, so we bought a new one. View full review »
DataCent1a09
Data Center Operations at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
It was the first solution that we defined, at the beginning of the data center, so it has always been there. Since I joined the team after the data center was already implemented, I don't have a previous scenario to compare it to, what it has improved or not. View full review »
Erik-Johnson
HP-UX System Admin at L3 Technologies Inc
We moved to 3PAR from a different array, which was a smaller array with fewer controller cards in it. So, 3PAR did not increase our performance, and it has increased our latency by at least double. We went with 3PAR because we have HP-UX systems. Since we already knew HP-UX, they offered us a significantly cheaper solution than the one that we had for storage. View full review »
VirtualizationSysAdmin415
Virtualization Systems Administrator at a university with 10,001+ employees
We were using HPE EVA. We had a lot of issues with it to begin with. Anytime you wanted to do an upgrade, you had to take systems offline. That just would not work for us. We switched when our warranties were up. View full review »
Ricky Santos
System Administrator at ON Semiconductor Phils. Inc.
Previously we were using HP EVA but since this is an old solution, we wanted to upgrade. We wanted to try a newer solution with almost the same features, like HPE 3PAR. View full review »
MarioSolano
VP Infrastructure at a marketing services firm with 10,001+ employees
We came from the EVA which was the previous version and this is, hands-down, way better. It has a smaller footprint and is actually quicker than the EVA. View full review »
Wes Wimpey
Systems Architect at Greenville Health Systems
We took a look at what our current challenges were with just traditional compute and storage, and we were not fully integrated with those solutions. This solution allowed us to standardize on one platform and be able to deliver it in a quick way. That was all around the most beneficial. View full review »
ManagerL4e9d
Manager Lab Operations at a tech vendor with 5,001-10,000 employees
The decision to find a solution is based on internal requirements. We need storage capacity. Currently, we have, let's say, two petabytes. When we needed more storage then we'll think about expanding the existing storage or buying a brand new system. The important criterion for us when looking at vendors is performance. We recently evaluated all-flash-based arrays and the hybrid model, and how they handle I/O throughput. Those are the key areas. We went with 3PAR because it is easy to use and we are very familiar with firmware which is easy to manage. Creating the internal groups and other areas is very easy for us. View full review »
IctCounte381
ICT Country Manager at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees
We were previously using NetApp. We needed a new solution because: * Our old unit was very old. * We had requirements from our production. View full review »
Kasper Billeskov
Storage Service Architect at NNIT
We were using EMC VMAX, EMC VNX, and NetApp. We switched due to price. View full review »
Computerd47b
Computer Systems Administrator at a sports company with 501-1,000 employees
Our previous solution was between five to six years old, so we were looking for something newer, like all-flash. View full review »
Assistan151c
Assistance Administrator with 11-50 employees
We had an old HPE SAN. We compared one 3PAR to the SAN. Then, we wanted to set up replication between our DR sites, so we purchased another 3PAR. View full review »
David Barrientos
IT Architect at a wholesaler/distributor with 10,001+ employees
We implemented this solution when it was time to renew the servers. Prior to this, we used HP EVA, but it had reached end-of-life. View full review »
Director9019
Director at a non-profit with 51-200 employees
Our data center was compromised and I had to replace the entire data center. Our previous solution was HPE LeftHand. The most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor are * cost * reliability * support. View full review »
Dharmendra Gurtata
IT Manager at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We were an XP7 shop and we went from that to 3PAR. View full review »
Cindy Cecutti
Director IT at a insurance company with 201-500 employees
This product is an improvement over what we had before. Our old solution, which was an HP Blade Server, was four years old. We wanted to switch to newer technology. View full review »
Adminitrd884
Assistant Manager of Infrastructure at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
We needed the capacity and faster processing. View full review »
Raphael Gondim
Coordinator at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
We did not use another solution previously. View full review »
Alan Drummond
Delivery Director at Schneider Electric
We used older HPE solutions. We worked with our HPE rep. He described some of the functionality and we could see how it fit into our organization. Our most important criteria when evaluating a vendor are * performance * support. We went with HPE because we had worked with them and they met our requirements. Those were the main drivers. They had proven support and reliability. View full review »
Doug Newell
Engineering Services Manager at Muckleshoot
We previously did not use another solution. View full review »
Eduardo Fontanella
Infrastructure Manager at a construction company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Previously, we had another solution where we have some problems. The application would be waiting for the IO. With 3PAR, everything was solved. The solution, stability, and the performance work well for us. View full review »
ITManagedead
IT Manager at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We had EVAs before, then switched to an earlier generation of 3PAR. View full review »
Guillermo Daniel Lisotti
IT Manager at Judiciary of Neuquen
We have already some IBM storage, but we are not happy with it. After checking out other models, we decided to work with 3PAR. Not only because we are familiar with HPE, but also the features combined well with our services. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Dell EMC, NetApp and others in All-Flash Storage Arrays. Updated: February 2020.
407,096 professionals have used our research since 2012.