No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Hitachi VSP 5000 Series vs NetApp AFF comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Everpure FlashArray
Sponsored
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
231
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (3rd)
Hitachi VSP 5000 Series
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays (14th)
NetApp AFF
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
315
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (2nd), NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays (2nd)
 

Featured Reviews

Sowjanya MV - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at Wipro Limited
Has improved performance for mission-critical workloads and enabled seamless non-disruptive upgrades
The availability is 99.99%, which is the main factor any customer would need because their data should be available whenever they want to access it. This is one main critical thing. It is very easy to upgrade since Pure Storage FlashArray handles it well. Everything is non-disruptive now; previously, there were forklift shifts, but now that is not the case. Pure Storage FlashArray says no to forklift upgrades. Usually hardware requires downtime, but Pure Storage FlashArray has improved their footprint so that they are not asking for downtime; everything is just a non-disruptive activity, which is why customers are more inclined towards Pure Storage FlashArray. Customers want more of the models in their environment due to the performance they are giving, and everything is in one Pure1 Array console where we can view all the models on one page or just an orchestration tool. You don't miss anything; you have replication, notifications about replication, and details about which host groups replication is happening in and if that replication is successful or failed. On a daily basis, our purpose is to create volumes for infrastructure; our daily activities include creating volumes and mapping them to the host, doing any migrations from a VM, clearing the data stores, and carving the volumes to those VMs. One key factor is the data compression with a ratio of 5:1, focusing on space efficiency, inline deduplication, and the compression Pure Storage FlashArray works on; that is a major factor we can suggest to any customer. Analytical capabilities are crucial. Daily, we check the throughput and consumption, and Pure Storage FlashArray provides predictions for one year regarding usage. This prediction helps plan updates well ahead. For support, we just raise a case, and they follow up and get it done. There is also AI readiness, but with the model R2, we don't have much of that AI readiness. For others, we do have AI readiness that predicts capacity based on daily or monthly trends, enabling us to analyze how much space we need or if we need to expand the disk shelf. From an operational point of view, a good feature is that if you accidentally delete a volume, it will be retained in the destroyed state for the next twenty-four hours, which is not the same with any other vendor. I have worked in this storage domain for the past fifteen years, and this option is remarkable, benefiting any L1 or L2 engineer. Additionally, from a compliance perspective, Pure Storage FlashArray has REST APIs enabled. I have not explored automation much, but from a security standpoint, it is strong with encryption data. If you want to automate, you can easily integrate with all clouds and explore Pure Cloud for scheduling workloads, including volume creation. Customers find benefit in Pure Storage FlashArray's single management pane of glass due to the dual controller and active-active setup. If one of the controllers goes down, all workloads automatically shift to the other controller, ensuring their data is safe and accessible at all times. This is a highlighted feature that any customer desires because their data should always be accessible. For SAN workloads, we use Pure Storage FlashArray because for SAN FC fiber channel, we don't use it; we use NetApp for NAS activities. We have clearly split this, so SAN is for mission-critical applications, while network-attached storage handles file systems. This architecture helps us maximize the benefit from Pure Storage FlashArray due to the significant workloads from this giant retail client. From a footprint and energy consumption perspective, you can see energy consumption from the Pure1 storage portal on a daily basis, and it is very compact. The three models we use consume only three units, which is quite low. From a footprint and data center perspective, it doesn't occupy much space. As everything moves to cloud, there are requirements to avoid excess spending on data centers, and Pure Storage FlashArray is efficient in energy consumption and is environmentally friendly.
Patrick Ammann - PeerSpot reviewer
Storage Administrator at Post CH AG
Provides reliable performance but could benefit from better deduplication management and intuitive admin tools
Regarding the NVMe over Fabrics feature of Hitachi VSP 5000 Series, we tested it, but there was no admin tool available for configuration until about a year ago. This was problematic for us, so we decided not to use it until we have the proper management tools. The main difficulty with this feature is that it's not supported for GAD devices, so Global-Active Devices are not supported with NVMe. That's basically what all our ESX platform is based on. We believe we would get the most benefit if we could use it in the ESX platform, but it's not supported yet. The deduplication impacts the quality of block storage that system administrators were accustomed to, resulting in increased service time due to the high CPU usage. The whole deduplication should be handled better in the next Plattform, should not have such a high impact on contoller CPU usage. The admin tools, called Ops Center Suite, have been inadequate for years, which Hitachi acknowledges. We had to find other vendors to provide a simple, fast GUI to provision storage. There are limitations, such as a storage pool only having 1024 pool volumes, which means the storage pool is maximum three petabyte in space. This requires building multiple storage pools, resulting in multiple pools where you have to keep some space as reserve. Having more than one storage pool forces you to have multiple times some percentage of storage capacity as a reserve, that you paid for but can't use it.
Mir Gulzar Ahmed - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at Synergy Computers
Unified storage has delivered efficient AI analytics and low latency for critical workloads
There might be some lag or response time with respect to support cases, but even then I will rate it 8.5 out of 10. All of this is the same for all product ranges, whether E-series, NetApp AFF, or FAS series, because they are very efficient to respond. The only reason I rated it 8.5 is because the warehouse for spare parts, when a problem comes, a spare is needed to replace it, for example, a disk. In Pakistan, they have only one warehouse in Karachi. This warehouse manages all the problems when a problem comes. They ship the part based on the customer use case and customer service request. That is the only reason I rate it 8.5 because they have only one warehouse in Pakistan, which is in Karachi. For example, if a problem comes in Islamabad, it will take time to deliver the spare because the part will be shipped from Karachi to Islamabad, which will take around maybe a day. Other OEMs have their warehouses in Islamabad, Lahore, and Karachi also. In terms of part replacement requirements, they are very efficient in that area because they have warehouses in multiple cities of Pakistan.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It has been very stable. I have not seen or heard of downtime storage issues after moving over to it."
"We noticed a dramatic increase in application performance when moving it from NetApp to Pure Storage."
"The solution is stable with low vulnerabilities."
"Performance is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray is the complete set of functions it provides."
"Once we solved the data reduction and what Pure does we were hooked."
"It benefits our IT organization in the way that it's easier for the administrators to manage."
"When users don't call wanting to kill me, that's ROI."
"One of the best features of the Hitachi VSP 5000 Series is the stability of the product."
"NetApp has sped up delivery for our virtual environment. It's been a great solution. Our customers have been amazed and overjoyed with the performance of our virtual environment, which uses VDI for virtual desktops and VMware for our virtual host servers. Everything is working seamlessly."
"AFF works well for VMware storage."
"Multi-protocol is the most valuable feature for us. It does everything in one system: sifts, EBES, ISCSI, and fiber channel. Other systems don't do all that."
"We went from a 59% uptime to a 99.9% uptime ratio, which is absolutely mind-blowing."
"Lower latency means faster end products."
"I would tell potential users that NetApp is one of the best primary storage systems with many good features."
"They’re easy and rock solid."
"Data efficiency is the most valuable feature because of the dedupe and compression."
 

Cons

"The scalability of the solution is extremely costly."
"It was not proactive communication."
"If there is one thing that I did not appreciate about Pure, it is that between the two different lines, which would be FlashBlade and Everpure FlashArray, there is no easy way to migrate LUNs as far as being able to replicate across those platforms."
"It took us a year to get it to stabilize and to get the best out of Pure."
"Everything has been good, but we faced one issue last year while migrating volumes from one Pure Storage to another. The snapshots were not visible in the Veeam backup portal."
"The backend of this solution utilizes an Active/Passive architecture, rather than an Active/Active architecture, which is a disadvantage, when compared to some of its competitors. Its storage capacity should be expanded in the next release."
"I think replication is one area that still needs improvement."
"It falls far short of protocol support."
"The whole deduplication should be handled better in the next platform and should not have such a high impact on controller CPU usage."
"It has not allowed us to save money, per se; there are other solutions that are probably cheaper in the flash arena, but this was a nice transition from our NetApp 7-mode to CDOT platforms."
"Their technical support needs improvement."
"We do need, however, more training, which NetApp wasn't able to provide."
"Something I've talked to NetApp about in the past is going more to a node-based architecture, like the hyper-converged solutions that we are doing nowadays."
"One of the features that I am looking for, which is already in the works, is to be able to take my code and automatically move it to the cloud."
"One minor improvement could be making scale-up solutions with AFF more cost-effective compared to scale-out options."
"NetApp could improve its security and AI features. In the latest version, I would like to see some ransomware protection."
"Support, I think could use a little bit of help. We can't seem to get to the backend guys fast enough."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price was slightly higher than others, but competitive, if you consider all the other features that you get from it."
"We lost a lot of customers because we couldn't compete on price with other vendors."
"Pure is typically more expensive than everyone else. You get what you pay for, but I have lost deals to similar solutions because of pricing. They include everything, and that's another positive about Pure Storage. They aren't trying to nickel and dime their customers for different features. It is all included in one price. The license is by capacity, and the price depends on the capacity and the discount we're getting from the vendor. You get the SKU of the physical appliance, support, and maintenance, and that's it. You're licensed for whatever feature they offer. It is all rolled up into the price of the appliance."
"Once you purchase Pure Storage FlashArray it is all-inclusive, you receive all the licenses needed."
"The pricing is an issue. However, being all-flash, it will always be sort of expensive."
"While it comes with a higher price tag, this investment often translates to significant improvements in performance."
"Pure is not a cheap product. It is not something that is inexpensive. But, the total cost of ownership tends to be lower than with other solutions, because you don't need a lot of expertise, you don't need a lot of training or very expensive engineers or very expensive consultants."
"In comparison to the competitors, Pure is very price-competitive for the future functionality that it provides."
Information not available
"NetApp is getting too expensive."
"When we bought NetApp, it was very reasonably priced. When you factor in the time savings, it's highly cost-effective."
"I would like it to be a lot less expensive, but it's been a very good solution for us."
"Look at the different options that NetApp offers. Look for a model and option which fits your needs correctly. Don't buy a low-end product for a high-end job."
"It is pretty expensive compared to other solutions. I would give it a seven or eight out of 10 in price (where 10 is expensive) compared to similar solutions."
"The price of NetApp is very expensive, but we don't know how much Pure is, so we can't compare."
"I think the pricing and licensing are a little high, but compared to those of other storage vendors, it's within reason. After the three-year prepay, the extended warranty is a little expensive."
"We don't like the cost. We would like to buy more."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions are best for your needs.
908,877 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user186357 - PeerSpot reviewer
Solutions Architect with 51-200 employees
Jan 28, 2015
NetApp vs. XtremIO
Is there another storage platform as feature rich as NetApp FAS? I think it is fair to say that NetApp FAS running Clustered Data ONTAP is a very feature rich platform – the move to the clustered version of ONTAP has brought many next-generation features including Scale-out and Non-disruptive…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
24%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
7%
Construction Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business71
Midsize Enterprise38
Large Enterprise159
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise47
Large Enterprise242
 

Questions from the Community

Which should I choose: HPE 3PAR StoreServ or Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series?
Both are great platforms, but if you are considering all flash solutions, I would recommend you to consider Pure Stor...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashArray?
I find the pricing of Everpure FlashArray to be quite high compared to other storage solutions; however, the reliabil...
What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashArray?
I believe we have covered the most important features; the architecture of Pure Storage is essential, and features su...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Hitachi VSP 5000 Series?
The cost of the solution is always too expensive, though it's difficult to make a direct comparison as all competitor...
What needs improvement with Hitachi VSP 5000 Series?
Regarding the NVMe over Fabrics feature of Hitachi VSP 5000 Series, we tested it, but there was no admin tool availab...
What is your primary use case for Hitachi VSP 5000 Series?
My main use cases for Hitachi VSP 5000 Series are basically all the block storage, mainly DBs and ESX.
What is the Biggest Difference Between Dell EMC Unity and NetApp AFF?
Well, Is one thing NetApp Storage has vs other brand is the mix of protocol CIFS with NFS booth working together in t...
What is the Biggest Difference Between Dell EMC Unity and NetApp AFF?
This question is very dependent on your requirements. Both are among the best in the field. Of course, the intended c...
What is the Biggest Difference Between Dell EMC Unity and NetApp AFF?
The answer depends on your needs and budget. If you want high performance (who doesn't) or let's say the latency matt...
 

Also Known As

Pure Storage FlashArray
No data available
NetApp All Flash FAS, NetApp AFF, NetApp Flash FAS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
Information Not Available
DreamWorks Animation, FICO, Yahoo! Japan
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Nutanix and others in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays. Updated: July 2026.
908,877 professionals have used our research since 2012.