We performed a comparison between Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Pure Storage FlashBlade based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about MinIO, Dell Technologies, Red Hat and others in File and Object Storage."We can run code and deploy it whenever we want."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The solution is scalable."
"Its elasticity and flexible pricing are the most valuable. For Amazon EFS, you are charged based on the storage. It is also very fast and stable with a very simple and intuitive interface."
"EFS is flexible."
"We are not that big of a cloud user. We just use it for the storage of our bytes. The most valuable aspect is the storage."
"Pure Storage FlashBlade is user-friendly. It's replication feature is great because it has active replication and active DR. That's the beauty of the product. It's a perfect solution for block storage."
"I would rate this solution an eight plus. It has has good flexibility and stability, it's easy to manage and the response time is good."
"The ease of deployment and management has helped us simplify our storage. We also do not have to worry about capacity management as much. A lot of these things are native to Pure Storage."
"The initial setup was straightforward. If you know how to plug in power and network you're pretty much qualified. They were on site to configure the network, the box to fit into our network architecture. Other than that, we self-managed from there."
"It uses the same platform for connectivity so integration is seamless."
"We can capacity plan at a greater level than we used to."
"We have integrated it with VMware. The integration process is pretty good. Especially with VMware, it helps with the capacity of it."
"It is very easy to use, and it is very fast."
"The interface seems strange and complicated."
"Its deployment process could be faster while installing the Python package directly into the environment."
"The lack of transparency in the costs attached to the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"It should be simplified. There are people who don't have cloud experience. It should be storage that we are able to just connect to."
"Specifically, when it comes to the file system for the learning system, we encountered performance issues with both Azure and AWS."
"The product's stability has some shortcomings where improvements are required."
"It could be better in connecting with Windows Server instances."
"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."
"An area for improvement in Pure Storage FlashBlade is its price. It could be reduced. The technical support for Pure Storage FlashBlade also needs improvement. It used to be good, with more experienced engineers. Nowadays, it isn't, and it takes longer for support to solve problems."
"I would also like to see better support for CIFS workloads."
"Compared to, for example, Hitachi NAS, the solution is not mature at all. It's just in its infancy as far as technology goes."
"It's on the expensive side, as expected for a niche product."
"File storage needs a lot of improvement. Mainframe connectivity also needs improvement because it requires additional components to be integrated with Pure Storage FlashBlade. If you want to keep your backup data, then this becomes an even more expensive solution because Pure Storage FlashBlade will not be able to meet your backup needs."
"The technical support needs to improve. When we open a case, it is auto assigned to a support tech person. Nine out of ten times, we get an email right back saying that person is off until tomorrow. I cannot handle that. They just did this over the weekend to us, too. I had to call our rep and have them do something about it."
"It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release."
"I would like to see more deduplication."
More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is ranked 9th in File and Object Storage with 10 reviews while Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 6th in File and Object Storage with 31 reviews. Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is rated 8.6, while Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) writes "With an easy setup phase in place, it offers great integration capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "A high-performing and scalable solution that improves data performance for S3 workloads". Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, Google Cloud Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon S3 Glacier and Azure NetApp Files, whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, MinIO, Pure Storage FlashArray and Red Hat Ceph Storage.
See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.
We monitor all File and Object Storage reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
