We performed a comparison between Fungible Storage Cluster and Pure Storage FlashBlade based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage."It upgrades in place which means we'll be using it well into the future."
"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."
"The solution offers amazing performance."
"Their support system has insight into errors on our SAN fabric that we can't see. They've brought attention to and raised awareness for us about things that we couldn't see, when we were experiencing problems."
"The most valuable feature is how it simplifies the management of the SAN."
"Because we were able to afford to go all flash, we don't manage the tiers, we're not moving data up, and we're not waiting for overnight cycles."
"We also use VMware integrations developed by Pure, their plugins in our vCenter environment. They help by allowing our non-technical operations teams to deploy new data stores and resize data stores without me having to involve myself all the time to do those simple tasks."
"It's just very easy for general block storage."
"The most valuable features are that it is easy to implement and configure, easy to use, and really reliable."
"We have seen a reduction in the total cost of ownership by around 20%."
"Using this solution has made our backups more reliable."
"Speed and ease of use are the two most valuable features."
"The most valuable features are the Metro clustering, and disaster recovery."
"The initial setup is pretty quick."
"The solution is able to handle workloads and is easy to use. It allows us to actually manage the boxes in less time."
"It has absolutely simplified our storage because the dashboards on the consoles show a clear understanding of where you are, and it is also very easy to provision. This been a big help for our teams."
"What I like best about Pure Storage FlashBlade is its object storage functionality, plus it has fast underlying hardware. Pure Storage FlashBlade is also very stable. I find its stability one of its valuable features."
"We need to add more storage in Pure Storage FlashArray with the cluster mode activated for us to have better performance."
"The data reduction that we had initially anticipated when we bought Pure and we move over, is way lower than the expected reduction. It depends on the workloads, of course. But that has been a challenge at times."
"I would like to have support available in Spanish."
"Self-backup is the only feature lacking in this solution."
"Storage. There could be better storage."
"It's too early to tell if we've seen a reduction in total cost of ownership. The solution is expensive."
"I would like a feature to integrate with external or cloud solutions. For example, if I want to use this storage for a backup from the cloud, I want to have integration with the cloud vendors, such as Microsoft, Oracles, or Amazon. It could be available as an API to allow seamless integration. Additionally, the solution could improve by having native integration with a cloud provider, such as VMware or Microsoft, this would reduce the need to use third-party solutions to complete the task."
"A three wave application or multi wave application synchronization would be an improvement."
"The security and reporting could be improved."
"It usually comes down to just what you hit and the value you're getting when you spend the money and license the products. I would always go, "If you want to make things better, lower your price and make your licensing simpler." There's always an opportunity around that."
"The feature that we're waiting on is better integration with the cell services."
"We haven't been able to use much of the cloud area of Pure Storage. We have a storage server and it would be better if it could integrate with other cloud features of this solution."
"I would also like to see better support for CIFS workloads."
"I would like to see more VM-Aware features in the next release of this solution."
"The features provided for SMB customers are limited."
"It's on the expensive side, as expected for a niche product."
"I would like to see the licensing fees improved as well as the price per terabytes."
Earn 20 points
Fungible Storage Cluster is ranked 33rd in All-Flash Storage while Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 16th in All-Flash Storage with 31 reviews. Fungible Storage Cluster is rated 7.0, while Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Fungible Storage Cluster writes "Easy to implement and configure but the security and reporting could be improved". 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". Fungible Storage Cluster is most compared with , whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, MinIO, Red Hat Ceph Storage and Dell ECS.
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.