Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Fujitsu vs Pure FlashArray X NVMe comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 5, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Fujitsu
Ranking in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays
17th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Pure FlashArray X NVMe
Ranking in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays
6th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays category, the mindshare of Fujitsu is 0.7%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pure FlashArray X NVMe is 4.0%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Pure FlashArray X NVMe4.0%
Fujitsu0.7%
Other95.3%
NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays
 

Featured Reviews

Alexander Kühn - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Project Manager Varna Information Technology / Owner at Varna Informationstechnology EOOD
Easy to use, but price is an area that needs to be improved
The question you have to ask yourself these days would be whether you need classical SAN storage or do you want to go with a modern approach like SaaS-based storage. If you want classical storage, Fujitsu is still a good product. If you want to be safer and work with off the shelf hardware,then go with NetApp. Don't pay the markup price charged by big storage vendors. My company has not faced any issues with the product's integration capabilities. The tool is basically used as a block device, so it's quite easy and simple at what it does. I rate the tool a seven out of ten.
Jaehoon Oh - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Technology Officer at Lambda256
Supports efficient storage management through volume snapshots and offers reliable non-disruptive upgrades
I have no specific improvements to suggest for Pure FlashArray X NVMe at this time. The performance statistics could be enhanced. I can see the performance statistics in the Pure Storage console, but it does not show the performance by 4K byte unit. It displays IOPS and bandwidth, but IOPS is about real use, and I want to know how many IOPS are currently running in 4K byte units. I cannot see that IOPS because most storage systems report their performance by 4K byte unit. I want to see Pure Storage performance by 4K byte unit to compare with other storage or other internal NVMe SSD.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It stands out for its affordability and the ability to provide unified storage."
"The solution's most valuable features stem from the DX series and the all-flash storage system."
"I appreciate the performance."
"The best features of Pure FlashArray X NVMe include the volume snapshot capabilities, which allow us to save most of the storage space by volume snapshots periodically."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and performance."
"On a scale of one to ten, I rate Pure FlashArray as ten."
"The database workloads are pretty fast because I frequently move data from here to there."
"It's incredibly easy to use and greatly simplified our ability to both deploy and manage our storage subsystems."
"It has benefited my organization because it has reduced time to insights."
"The latency is good."
 

Cons

"The product's prices are an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The graphical interface is somewhat lacking, and it doesn't cover all the necessary tasks, often requiring users to resort to the command line for completion."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"If the customer only needs 500 terabytes and doesn't care how much data they'll put in the server, IBM is cheaper than Pure."
"They could add more support for file storage and different types of storage."
"It feels more suitable for small and medium-sized businesses rather than enterprises."
"The tool's pricing is higher than competitors."
"There is room for improvement in catering to midrange storage needs, especially for customers seeking Enterprise-class features."
"There are some challenges with data encryption and reduction."
"We need better data deduplication."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The entry-level midrange model from Fujitsu is cost-effective for our target market"
"There is a need to make yearly payments towards the licensing charges associated with the product."
"The tool's pricing is cheap; I rate it a six to seven out of ten. Most of our sales are not subscription-based. We sell the hardware, and customers keep using it. They only renew the service part annually. The support can be a bit pricey, but the solution is more cost-effective than anything else out there."
"The tool is an investment that we've budgeted for. While the prices may be higher than those of other vendors, we see it as a market leader with benefits. We don't regret purchasing it."
"They can tout the functionality and cutting edge technology that they have, but that's where the price tag comes in. The cost is high, but I think as they grow their business and get more customers that it will probably go down a little bit."
"We pay approximately $50,000 USD per year in licensing fees."
"The support cost per array is about $20,000 a year for 24/7 support."
"Given its price, Pure is not the first option."
"As far as the licensing costs, everything is included in the license."
"The product is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions are best for your needs.
879,711 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise12
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fujitsu?
There is a need to make yearly payments towards the licensing charges associated with the product.
What needs improvement with Fujitsu?
In terms of Fujitsu, the classical storage systems are going to be obsolete in my point of view. With SaaS storage tools, you have everything in software, and you have big advantages and more easy ...
What is your primary use case for Fujitsu?
I use the solution in my company to run the VM clusters with Fujitsu's database, as well as everything else we have in our company.
What do you like most about Pure FlashArray X NVMe?
Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure FlashArray X NVMe?
The price of Pure FlashArray X NVMe is very expensive, though I do not know the actual price because I am using the Evergreen monthly payment. I do not know the exact device price, but I think the ...
What needs improvement with Pure FlashArray X NVMe?
I have no specific improvements to suggest for Pure FlashArray X NVMe at this time. The performance statistics could be enhanced. I can see the performance statistics in the Pure Storage console, b...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Pure FlashArray//X NVMe, Pure FlashArray//X, FlashArray//X
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Fremont Bank, Judson ISD, The Nielsen Company
Find out what your peers are saying about Fujitsu vs. Pure FlashArray X NVMe and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,711 professionals have used our research since 2012.