Choose a specific buying criteria from the list and see what real users have to say about it.

HPE 3PAR Flash Storage Other Solutions Considered

4b248d21 820a 476e b675 95abde1f5c1c avatar
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 »
55ca838b 083c 46ae 80f6 602fb0a56916 avatar
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
Senior Datacenter Specialist at a aerospace/defense firm with 1,001-5,000 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 »
A47dc265 c2b2 4bda aa5b 4d0f32f6b6a8 avatar
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 »
Bbf4955f b215 4993 b917 d27dddc64ed5 avatar
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
Head - IT, Product Engineering & Service Delivery
We evaluated the NetApp ( ) solution. view full review »
47ff26d1 5c5a 4106 aa22 fffa524c18dc avatar
Storage specialist, Infrastructure Architect at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We evaluated some of the EMC ( ) products and NetApp ( ) was being looked at. view full review »
7551262d 692b 49c2 8157 e3fea7c97735 avatar
Project Manager at a government with 11-50 employees
Other systems evaluated were Dell Equalogic, Hitachi, IBM, Netapp. view full review »
Anonymous avatar x60
Operations Manager
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
Storage Engineer at Syniverse
Since we're an EMC shop, we test a lot of stuff. view full review »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
Wintel Engineer at a non-tech company with 5,001-10,000 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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
7720b034 ff1f 472a aa05 b27600e05a4c avatar
Sales Channel Manager at Portenntum
We didn't evaluate any other solutions besides HPE. view full review »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
Network Admin at a software R&D 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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Robert botzer avatar 1433934565
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
3eb85e00 8d92 421f b39f b4883ec48e07 avatar
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 »
Cd8a139f e6e5 49b8 96eb 4ab0a9dc006d avatar
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
E16ca8b7 2598 4e75 80ef 54a1e61d45da avatar
Storage Engineer Architect at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We received four replies on the RFP, and HPE beat them all in terms of price. view full review »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
Department head Data AOS at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We looked at some of the bigger vendors like Dell EMC and IBM, of course. view full review »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
Broadcasting Technologist at a media company with 1,001-5,000 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 »
7f712f4e 67c6 4812 8305 a89cef4de05c avatar
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
7305ae87 f87a 495e 9a98 087471f37769 avatar
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
Network Administrator at a transportation company 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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
Infrastructure Architect at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees
We evaluated EMC, Nimble, IBM, NetApp, and Pure Storage. view full review »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
1b6a964a 0e28 4249 ae14 e0616ae6132e avatar
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
Sr. SAN Engineer at a tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
I'm not going to say we're a one vendor shop, we are primarily an HPE shop. We have probably 95 percent of our stuff is HPE. We do have a little bit of EMC and that's who was in the running. I can't speak to necessarily why that decision was made, per se. From my personal experience between EMC and 3PAR, 3PAR's a little bit easier to manage in my aspect. It also seems to be somewhat a little bit more reliable. It has those features that you need to do some of the things such as mobility, whereas, on the EMC side, you have the XtremIO, which is all SSD; very, very fast. I don't know about reliability because I've not used it that much. In order to get the mobility out of it, you have to put a VPLEX in front of it which adds latency onto your transactions. It also adds a layer of complexity and it chews up a ton of SAN ports. With the 3PAR, we can put all that in, in a smaller SAN factor, not use so many SAN ports and we get all of that in basically a one-bundle thing. Plus, the vast majority of what we're deploying is 3PAR, so we don't need more than that. Going on the EMC route just doesn't make a lot of sense to us. It's a business decision way above my head, but from my perspective, and I think from other engineers' perspectives, since the decision was made to stay with HPE on a lot of things, it just makes more sense to us to do it that way. view full review »
Anonymous avatar x60
Technical Advisor - IT Service Management (ITSM) at a logistics company with 1,001-5,000 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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
44b74788 00a9 474e beae c2f86954af25 avatar
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
837d639c e3ee 46e9 8e77 c067f16b917b avatar?1452760206
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
Integrator at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
I still use Dell. We also looked at EMC. view full review »
Anonymous avatar x60
Senior IT Engineer at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We looked at EMC, Nimble, and Pure Storage, but 3PAR is the market leader. view full review »
Anonymous avatar x60
Infrastructure Specialist VMware/Server at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
* EMC * NetApp * Whiptail The storage team tech lead chose HP over these. view full review »
12070d57 bbf8 4141 b7f8 82377b6489e9 avatar?1451302698
Senior Server Engineer/Service Owner at a software R&D company with 501-1,000 employees
We evaluated Hitachi and we chose HP because of the price and ease-of-use. view full review »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
1c23f29e 27bc 4ad1 a25b d68e2c43ae3e avatar
Database & Hosting Team leader at a media company with 1,001-5,000 employees
I did evaluate five other vendors, one example Nimble, however, at that time they only had iSCSI model available. view full review »
C8cfab42 d780 4a0b b73a f97d35b0681d avatar
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 »
Ad316486 1fda 4ee8 ac1a 072030fa5883 avatar
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 »
19ca026a d5d2 4abc 9126 ff5856c0be18 avatar
Sr. Systems Engineer at a tech services company 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 »
6d776421 0fef 46f9 be13 418ccb4aa974 avatar
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 »
97368450 e9e7 4cfb 935c 41babd3897ee avatar
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 »
Anonymous avatar x60
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 »
33ef7fc3 8e08 4907 9717 42f0b04a2e46 avatar
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 »

Sign Up with Email