We performed a comparison between HPE 3PAR StoreServ and INFINIDAT InfiniBox 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."The most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray is the complete set of functions it provides."
"It helps to simplify storage because it has an easy front-end to access everything."
"Access speed and power consumption are most valuable."
"Technical support is excellent. I've had very good responses from technical support. We had a couple of cases where we needed support. Some of the communications were purely over email and some has been an actual call to the service desk."
"It comes with a large number of features out-of-the-box, which makes it easy for us to see problems and manage capacity."
"Data deduplication is one feature I found to be the most valuable in the tool...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"We like the data reduction rates. That has been really helpful. You get 4U of Pure storage replacing something like two racks of spinning disks. One of the things that has contributed to that are the data reduction rates."
"The most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray are the management view of the solutions, ease of provision, and deprovision, it is fantastic."
"It runs. I don't have a problem with it. If it needs an update, I can do it in the middle of the day with nobody being the wiser. It is phenomenal in that respect. As a hospital, I get two hours every quarter to reboot things, so it is imperative that nothing goes down."
"When we bought it, the big sell for us was what they called "wide striping", how they striped the data and could get performance on a cheaper disk. Nowadays, the newer models that are out, which we are going to in the next couple of years, the most valuable feature is mainly being able to achieve such high IOPS in such a small chassis."
"It's reliable and it's fast."
"We also use dynamic optimization to go between tiers."
"The solution’s deduplication functionality works great. We are getting about a 16:1 dedupe ratio on our VM workloads."
"The solution has helped our organization reduce time to deployment by about 60 to 70 percent, because I am able to spin up new systems within four to six hours, where it used to take me two to three days."
"We use for our tier one and two apps, so they can do failover, synchronous replication."
"The technical support is very good."
"This product has good performance."
"Mostly, their support is also great at reacting to issues but moreover, proactive to prevent issues."
"It took us a year to get it to stabilize and to get the best out of Pure."
"It is a bit expensive."
"Storage. There could be better storage."
"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."
"We do have an issue with the vCenter integration. Pure Storage says it has a lot of free space, but vCenter says its completely full. This is because their dedupes are saved as space, but Vcenter still detects the disk as completely full. So, we do have an issue with that."
"It is way in excess of what we need. If anything, we could see a bit more speed. I'm just comparing it with what some of my colleagues who are implementing their own systems do."
"They should work on their upgrades, they're not smooth."
"The price of this solution could be improved."
"The Unified Multiprotocol Access to the storage array needs to be improved."
"The product is quite expensive."
"I would like to see more cloud-based integrations and more file storage capabilities."
"The solution lacks reliability."
"This solution should be easier to use."
"The solution could improve by being more secure."
"It needs the addition of InfoSight, which is the most critical, along with predictive analytics and AI."
"I would like to see compatibility with NVMe."
"The response time for read requests can be improved."
"InfiniBox, right now, offers only asynchronous replication between two storages."
Earn 20 points
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 9th in All-Flash Storage with 299 reviews while INFINIDAT InfiniBox is ranked 7th in Enterprise SAN. HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.6, while INFINIDAT InfiniBox is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of HPE 3PAR StoreServ writes "The product's technical support is outstanding as I can reach someone right away". On the other hand, the top reviewer of INFINIDAT InfiniBox writes "Good performance, suitable for big data, but the response time could be improved". HPE 3PAR StoreServ is most compared with HPE Primera, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, NetApp AFF and HPE StoreOnce, whereas INFINIDAT InfiniBox is most compared with NetApp AFF, Dell Unity XT, Dell XtremIO, VMware vSAN and Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform.
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.
I recommend 3PAR Storages. Are very robust and in years I so only some disk replaced compared with other vendors.
Also 3PAR AFA should have best IOPS and Latency performance.
As Anush said you never know what big fish will eat Infinidat and how will be after!
at this games all the constructor think that they are better, the real test is what the real need is the workload otherwise the workload splits in percentage and then either do POC or if you do not have the time to ask you commitment of performance with precise targets
HPE 3PAR All Flash:
Is a traditional AFA that runs the same 3PAROS, the benefits of which are that, data is broken down into chunklets and striped across for performance and redundancy. If you have disparate 3PAR models across sites, you can still replicate etc. 3PAR has great thin provisioning, replication, metro clustering capabilities. Depending on the Storserv model, you can categorize it as a Tier1 storage.
Infinidat:
While I have personally not worked on Infinidat, I have met them and discussed the product. It belongs in the same layer at VMAX, HDS VSP G1000, IBM DS88xx etc. It is intended for mission critical apps and delivers probably the indusstry’s only 7 9s availability. It has been widely adopted by Fortune 500/100 organizations. My concern with Infinidat would be obvious: support across geographies, they are always a candidate for acquisition etc.
In short, you cant go wrong with either. You would want to look at the apps being run (mission critical etc) and probably beyond everything else the cost. Hope that helps.
It all depends on your workdloads. If it is a virtual workload than Tintri is the best All Flash solution. simplicity, visibiltiy, destiny, performance, Etc.
3PAR
Full disclosure, we can sell the HPE 3PAR Flash and I haven’t run up against INFINIDAT, which would make me be more hesitant to sell that unit! We use 3PAR in our Cloud Storage and it is a very robust and secure SAN. Let me check with one of our SAN SE’s to see if I can get anymore clarification for you, but if the person asking isn’t another VAR/MSP, we can definitely help them with the HPE 3PAR storage.
Yes, I agree
Numi is quite correct 3PAR AFA and Infinidat are two very different products, the 3PAR aimed at workloads that require low latency and Infinidat at more general workloads like OLTP, backup, etc.
Without know what sort of workloads you are trying to support its hard to make a recommendation, however one word of caution for the 3PAR's is due to their use of ASIC's, support for large blocksizes (128GB and above) is less than stellar and wouldn't recommend them.