We performed a comparison between HPE StoreVirtual and IBM Spectrum Virtualize based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"StoreVirtual is that it is our software-defined solution and it's everywhere."
"A company can scale it easily."
"It appears to be very stable and very robust."
"It's very stable and it's easy to use."
"The solution is quite stable. We haven't had any issues with glitches or bugs."
"Simplicity of not having to buy FC or FCoE SAN. Instead, we buy servers with their own storage."
"It allows compute and storage to operate separately, and has the ability to take SAN nodes out of production for maintenance with little effort and zero downtime."
"HPE StoreVirtual is very easy to use from the management console."
"The ability to have a feature-rich software set which extends the capabilities of the back-end storage arrays."
"Migration from configurations where servers have storage provisioned from older SAN disk systems to newer storage systems is almost seamless using image mode migration techniques, with only a short outage of the servers."
"Although the GUI from the XIV was used (in my view), IBM has polished and refined the GUI providing a pleasant and easy to navigate GUI experience."
"The abstraction flair and the abstraction layer. We had a mixture of different storage arrays, and the wonderful thing about SVC is is that it normalizes all it into a single driver. A single view that all hosts see simultaneously."
"The scalability is very good. It can handle anywhere from very small to large enterprise class."
"We are happy with the support that IBM provides us."
"There are many benefits to this solution. Storage virtualization and the ability to migrate massive amounts of data to other systems without impacting your client are the most valuable. It is non-disruptive for my users. We migrated 350 terabytes of data in one night to a new machine without a small system going down and a single user complaining about the performance. You have to fine-tune a lot of storage machines constantly for performance and for making sure that they are optimal, but IBM Spectrum Virtualize does this by itself. It does the adjustment on its own, and it does it right. That's what makes it different. I had a huge VSP from Hitachi, which is also a type of virtualization-based engine but with a decent size. It was a continuous performance-tuning exercise. I never had that issue with IBM Spectrum Virtualize."
"We acquire companies (and things), so we end up with odd hardware. We bring it behind the SVC and it allows us to migrate stuff off of it seamlessly. SVC can also cover up a host of defects of the underlying storage."
"It is a costly solution."
"Hardware and disk failures are happening frequently."
"Product looks like it is in the end of development."
"Configuration of application integrated snapshots for VMware is convoluted and it did not work immediately."
"f you're doing the 10Gb adapters, SFPs don't come with it, but it doesn't say that. It might say that somewhere else, but it's not clear."
"One of the areas that need improvement is the consolidated management platform, to manage all of the nodes from one place and the licensing around that."
"The GUI is a bit old-fashioned. It should be updated."
"I would like to have this solution easily integrate with VMware."
"GUI should be developed in HTML5 as opposed to Java."
"The integration would be an option that we would like, but I understand that's not how it's going to be implemented."
"I would like to see more baseline replication and integration with the operating system between Vmware and IBMI."
"There are things that occur when you get to this size and capacity. We're very large, i.e., petabytes. When you get to that sheer volume of the numbers of things, it is too big for people to keep track of."
"I hate I/O groups. If you start swapping I/O groups, they can be potentially risky. If they could get rid of the whole I/O group principle, the risk is not there anymore. I understand the fundamental thing about I/O groups, but they are risky."
"Tighter integration with cloud storage might be useful as a target for a variety of use cases."
"The disk reliability is not that good."
"The Storwize port is not so stable."
HPE StoreVirtual is ranked 13th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 50 reviews while IBM Spectrum Virtualize is ranked 14th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 35 reviews. HPE StoreVirtual is rated 8.2, while IBM Spectrum Virtualize is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of HPE StoreVirtual writes "Using this platform, we were able to provide virtual desktops (VDI) to our end users across WAN, to help alleviate some of the problems that we’ve had with bandwidth". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Spectrum Virtualize writes "Robust, stable, with good performance, and easy to implement". HPE StoreVirtual is most compared with VMware vSAN, HPE SimpliVity, Red Hat Ceph Storage, StarWind Virtual Tape Library and StorMagic SvSAN, whereas IBM Spectrum Virtualize is most compared with Dell VPLEX, VxRail, VMware vSAN, IBM Spectrum Scale and DataCore SANsymphony. See our HPE StoreVirtual vs. IBM Spectrum Virtualize report.
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors.
We monitor all Software Defined Storage (SDS) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
