We performed a comparison between Dell Unity XT and NetApp NVMe AFF A800 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two All-Flash Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The technical support is very good."
"It is an easy to use product for all of my team members."
"The first year, we started out with one or five terabytes and it took what was 20 terabytes of storage down to less than one terabyte."
"It's simple, powerful, and ready to use."
"Has also helped simplify storage for us. The other person we put in there, took about a week to implement. And we had both arrays set up within around four hours with a thirty minute drive time between the two locations."
"Redundancy and the fault tolerance of the platform are the most impressive."
"The ease of use. That's what our customers love. They say it's very easy, they don't need special training, they don't need to call us or any other company or integrator to help them do their job. That's the main reason they purchase Pure."
"The first set up we had was really straight forward and simple."
"Being all-flash makes everything super-fast. It's also great to manage. That's the easiest part. We also have another SAN, from Pure, and the Unity is easier to manage than the Pure."
"I like the idea that it can compress and dedupe inline. That is quite a stunning feature for mid-range customers."
"It's easy to handle for administrators and it's a unified system. It's not as complex as Celerra systems or CX4 Clariions to administrate. You can do everything with one GUI."
"Scheduled components are sourced from Korea based on their quality selection, with the actual purchase taking place in Vietnam. The notable features include cache memories and MOS feeder in Dell Unity. Additionally, the storage dynamics are managed uniformly on a global scale, whether it is a simple or wide-ranging configuration."
"Scalability is good."
"The compression and deduplication that will be coming in version 4.3. With just those features, you're reducing the amount of data and the footprint on the hardware."
"It's easy to manage. We access it and manage it through Unisphere and have had no issues. We're able to provision storage, create consistency groups, create RDMs for our virtual machines. Creating it through Unisphere, it automatically adds the data store on the VMware side and rescans the LUNS. We just have to add and configure the storage in one place and it takes care of everything, which is very handy."
"Key features are ease of use, ease of management, ease of deployment, and the GUI is very user-friendly."
"You can easily scale up, and scale-out."
"We find the product to be very flexible."
"Low latency is the most valuable feature."
"The storage features are valuable."
"NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is easier to use than some other solutions and the UI is very good to use for day-to-day activities. Overall, the solution has good technology."
"During the use cases of the solution, its reliability and suitability are the best."
"The most valuable features are stability and performance."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a product that is fast and provides a fast I/O."
"The number of Filesystems is limited, which it is not on the EMC VNX."
"We did have one hiccup with the integration of vCenter. When we were installing Pure Storage, we were using vCenter 6.7, which defaults to the HTML5 Web Client. The current plugin for Pure Storage doesn't show up in that client at all. You have to go and use the legacy FlexFlash client to see the Pure Storage plugin in vCenter."
"In some cases, we get into very in-depth conversations around movement of specific data and, what's more, chunk sizes. The documentation lacked any description or information on that."
"Beyond a certain amount of petabytes, you have to have a separate system. Basically, it's not infinitely scalable."
"We haven't seen ROI yet."
"Going forward, don't complicate things for the customers."
"The only time that we had problems with it was that there was a bug in the VVol implementation but, outside of that, it has been flawless."
"In the configuration, which we brought in or tested it in, it has a very limited config as far as the array goes. That said, it still did more than our anticipation."
"Support Responsiveness & time to fix bugs should be improved."
"They should update to the cloud."
"We have had some downtime. Nothing is perfect. Unity’s have had some code-release problems, versions that, from a compatibility perspective, had some glitches which caused an outage. But, given the amount of Unity’s we run, that has been fairly minor and it hasn't happened at scale or across all of our Unity’s."
"I would like to have secure mobile connectivity going forward. This would help me be more proactive."
"It could be a little easier to attach it to a network file system."
"We have only used this solution for less than one year so I don't have any improvements suggestions yet."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the deduplication part, because for large deduplications, you need an extra appliance to do it in order to avoid having problems in performance. I think that could be improved, because everything should be included in the product, not with an appliance from the outside."
"The VNX reporting is much more granular, versus the Unity reporting."
"Sometimes, it takes a while to get somebody competent on the other end of the line. They do have engineers in multiple time zones around the world. However, their level-one support is not always the best."
"Increasing the RAM, and including physical cords would be beneficial."
"The product's performance has some shortcomings, making it an area that could be a little better."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"The initial setup should be easier, and more like a plug-and-play approach."
"The cost of the solution is quite high. It would be ideal if they could adjust it so that it's a but less."
"Stability is an area with a certain shortcoming where the solution needs to improve"
"The initial setup is complex."
Dell Unity XT is ranked 4th in All-Flash Storage with 186 reviews while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is ranked 17th in All-Flash Storage with 10 reviews. Dell Unity XT is rated 8.4, while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Dell Unity XT writes "Easy to set up with good data compression technology and useful deduplication". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp NVMe AFF A800 writes "Very easy to manage, highly stable and offers robustness of the CLI, API, and GUI ". Dell Unity XT is most compared with Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, HPE Nimble Storage, IBM FlashSystem and HPE 3PAR StoreServ, whereas NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, Huawei OceanStor Dorado and Dell PowerMax NVMe. See our Dell Unity XT vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 report.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash 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.
