We performed a comparison between Dell XtremIO and Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform 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."It has been very stable. I have not seen or heard of downtime storage issues after moving over to it."
"It simplifies the overall management. We don't have to worry about storage anymore."
"The top-tier support and reliable storage are the most valuable features of this solution."
"We've had different types of storage, and three things of this solution are valuable. The first one is its outstanding performance. The second one is its stability. In the about three years that we've had it, we've had component failures, but we never had a service interruption or any data loss. The third one, which is really critical, is that it is super easy to use in terms of provisioning, storage, and managing the arrays. I'm able to maintain a multi-site environment with a couple of dozen arrays with a single mid-level storage admin."
"Having fast storage allows actual servers to perform in high capacity so we don't have slowdowns on our applications."
"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."
"Performance is the most valuable feature."
"The stability of Pure Storage is very very good."
"It has very good performance for an application which needs lower latency and a better response, for example, in microseconds."
"Initially, we faced numerous issues with our analytical systems. However, we saw performance improvement after the implementation of the solution."
"Ease of management, aside from the serious performance, is the best feature."
"The speed is extremely valuable."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its high performance."
"It is great for applications like Microsoft Exchange, ERP, SQL and VDI; basically saved the VDI buy-in from users, as now performance was seamless in comparison to a physical PC."
"It was very easy and straightforward to setup."
"The program is very stable."
"It's a state of the art solution in storage systems. High-availability and performance are the strongest aspects of these machines."
"It is the most stable high-end solution in this area."
"There are no significant challenges in terms of scalability, and it can accommodate larger storage capacities compared to other storage solutions."
"This is one of the most stable, high-end solutions in this area."
"The first thing that attracted this model to us was the non-disruptive migration. We had a very large database application that was on older gear and needed to be migrated to these arrays. We had experience with virtualizing behind an array and moving applications and data but this made it even better."
"The feature I like best is the stability of the hardware."
"Storage is the most valuable feature."
"I am happy about the storage system and availability."
"When we were doing some tests, we found that there was an I/O freeze when they were switching the controller."
"Had some issues with Purity not being entirely compatible with VMware ESXi."
"This product has only two active controllers, whereas other solutions can have more. This is something that needs to improve."
"In the next release I would like to see integration into other third-party player providers like Google."
"With scalability, I have run into a little problem with our last upgrade. There were some undocumented limitations to the number of drives that our controller could run on. So, instead of putting in a new data pack as we had anticipated, we had to keep adding and removing to get up to the capacity that we needed to be. What should have been a one day process (or a few hours) turned into a month and a half process."
"The support for NFS protocols right out-of-the-box need improvement. I'm used to other storage vendors who have NFS support right out-of-the-box, and Pure Storage doesn't seem to have anything."
"I would like to have an easy way to determine the cost per VM so that I can present a solution to our customers."
"Just some nit picky stuff, like allowing servers and volumes to be grouped. Therefore, it would easier to work with them in the GUI."
"One thing that should be improved is the reporting and monitoring tools. It should use real time monitoring for storage, IOPS, latency, etc."
"It is very expensive to scale. You have to buy an additional system to extend from one disc, for instance. It is scalable, but extremely expensive to do so."
"Scalability is something that can be improved because there is an issue when it comes to mixing versions."
"They can improve the product by providing an HTML5-based interface instead of the Java GUI based application."
"The GUI could be modified more in terms of how the different components are linked to each other."
"We've encountered challenges in integrating other products with Dell Xtremio, as it tends to be more vendor-locked. This means we can't easily explore other solutions that might work alongside Dell."
"I would like hardware capacity additions to be a little more flexible. The upgrade path for the existing XTremIO units requires you to purchase 2 XBricks at a time and they need to be the same capacity as the existing XBricks."
"This solution is geared toward enterprise-level companies. Small and medium-sized businesses would find it extremely expensive."
"The deployment could be a bit easier, because it's a bit tricky"
"The solution is stable. However, there have been some software crashes where we had to restart the system. They could improve the hardware to prevent this type of issue."
"There is a drawback related to Hitachi's configuration flexibility. The Hitachi storage platform solution is not flexible. That means that both the Hitachi and the partner presale guys have to do a lot of work to design a solution."
"The embedded management for installation feature has neither simplified nor complicated the management process, therefore, there is room for improvement."
"The interface should be simplified and made easier to use."
"Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform needs to improve its scalability options where there are a few shortcomings."
"The user experience is pretty bad in Hitachi. A lot of mandatory tasks take a long time to work through."
"The initial deployment was somewhat complex when it came to the installation because of the network connectivity. It was more difficult, in this specific case, than with other platforms."
More Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Dell XtremIO is ranked 25th in All-Flash Storage with 48 reviews while Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is ranked 8th in All-Flash Storage with 47 reviews. Dell XtremIO is rated 7.6, while Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Dell XtremIO writes "Suitable for high IOPS and helps get backup in ten minutes ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform writes "It's a high-performing solution with strong architecture". Dell XtremIO is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell PowerMax NVMe, Dell Unity XT, NetApp AFF and INFINIDAT InfiniBox, whereas Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is most compared with IBM FlashSystem, Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, Dell Unity XT and NetApp FAS Series. See our Dell XtremIO vs. Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform 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.
When we compare EMC XtremIO with HDS VSP F, there are quite a few things to be kept in the back of the mind:
1. The EMC XtremIO is an AFA that provides only block storage. It is a scale out system and works in terms of X-Bricks. The system can scale from 1-8 X-Bricks.
2. In terms of the benefits, the array is extremely simple to administer and support inline data efficiencies (de-dupe/compression etc).
3. While native replication wasn’t initially available, I believe it is there now as is integration with Recoverpoint.
4. In terms of positioning, we need to remember that, while it is an enterprise grade AFA and has been used to address Tier-0/1 requirements, it is still not the upper most echelon in the EMC hierarchy. The EMC VMAX all flash would be that.
5. The array relies on standard eMLC disks and there have been mentions of integration with NVMe.
6. If you are looking for metro clustering, you will need to rely on the VPLEX which can virtualize the XtremIO behind it. But this is a huge add on cost.
1. The HDS VSP F is a Tier-1 storage array that is intended for the most demanding of apps. Additionally it is among a few arrays that support mainframe connectivity (FICON).
2. HDS does not use standard eMLC drives but instead relies on HDS’s proprietary FMD drives which are pretty much similar to standard SSDs
3. The VSP F conforms to standard VSP architecture and is part of the redesigned portfolio of newer VSP systems (G600, 800 and 1000).
4. It supports enterprise grade replication, metro clustering (Global Active Device) natively.
5. HDS offers standard data efficiency features
6. HDS offers a data availability guarantee.
Comparison:
1. The selection would come down to what you are looking for. The XtremIO would probably be the less expensive option.
2. With HDS, the product has a proven stability/reliability record. The same is true to a great deal with XtremIO.
3. VSP F is treated as a tier-1 enterprise array that can deliver 6 ‘9’ availability which is not the case with XtremIO
4. HDS management interface is still pretty pathetic in comparison with EMC and HDS has never taken that seriously
5. Support is also not a huge differentiator with both EMC and HDS having global support
6. HDS is historically known for being very rigid in terms of what they allow you to do. Typically expansions, add on configs are handled by their own people which is actually not bad but generally at an add on cost.
7. In terms of market numbers, while XtremIO was EMC’s primary bread winner for the last 2-3 years, those numbers have come down and right now, the VMAX is dominating. HDS has been continuously losing market share and has not been innovating. These are things to consider.
8. In short, think about the use case, data criticality, capabilities you are looking for, level of availability, expansion etc. That should cut it. On the EMC side, do remember that, XtremIO integrates with ViPR and also with vRA. You may want to explore the VMAX option. You can start small on the VMAX and it would be a better buy in the longer run.
Conclusion:
1. For a company of around ~500 employees, I believe the XtremIO would suffice. Think about capacity and growth. The VSP would probably be an overkill unless you have a need for such capabilities.
Hello,
After trying and talking to various different NAS vendors (NetApp, EMC, Nimble, etc.)
We decided to go with PureStorage FlashBlades and we couldn’t be happier with faster I/O’s, better latency and overall very steady performance plus very low management on the IT side.
Alfred Morgan Jones did a very good job comparing EMC XtremIO and Hitachi Virtual Storage F series above. I recommend everyone to read his analysis. If someone must really make a choice between EMC XtremIO and Hitachi F series in terms of technology, reliability and support, then Hitachi F series is clear winner. Of course the nature of app. and data may change this based on whatever the criteria is. And finally money matters as well :)
Imho both Vendor´s have their pro´s and con´s. For our last Projects we do some POC´s with Pure with excellent results. So give them a try. POC with Pure is really easy to manage.
I’ve tested EMC XtremeIO two years ago, I don’t know Hitachi, but there are two things that push me to buy a Pure Storage, first is an EMC low performance with words more than 16 Kbits and the second is the design, I don’t want a big UPS in the middle of the more expensive/important storage.
Hi
Have you looked at the IBM V9000, has virtualisation software, with
microlatency modules instead of SSD drives which everyone else uses, SSD
can also be used, other disk can also be virtualised to ensure smooth
migration
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyEc1eLk1to
https://www-01.ibm.com/common/ssi/cgi-bin/ssialias?htmlfid=TSD03189USEN
I would recommend Hitachi.
I would consider Pure Storage, //m or //x. EMC X2 ridged upgrade policy and where it should have been 2 years ago. No upgrade path from X1 - X2 so will the same be true off X2 - X3?