We performed a comparison between HPE 3PAR StoreServ and NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) 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."The product cheaper compared to other solutions concerning the technology that they are using."
"It's just very easy for general block storage."
"The most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray are simplicity, ease of use, and dashboard management."
"I like the speed, and I like the API and how programmable it is."
"Simplicity and reliability are the most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray."
"The most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray are the management view of the solutions, ease of provision, and deprovision, it is fantastic."
"The most valuable feature is replication."
"The most valuable features in Pure Storage FlashArray are deduplication and active cluster."
"HPE 3PAR has all the common storage features like cell provisioning and deduplication. Usually the solution is chosen by the customer as they have a preference, or the setup is already in their environment."
"I like the integration with VMware and the provisioning. We also use data compression but not for any of the critical applications."
"We're hosting virtual infrastructure on the 3PAR storage and it's been very good for that."
"We deployed 3PAR in the national and international markets. It's not bad, the solution."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ has been stable."
"We choose 3PAR for its speed. It's so fast and reliable."
"It's a very popular product for enterprise storage."
"We never had a blackout and we have never been offline."
"Regarding features, SnapMirror is one we depend on right now. It helps us provide snapshots to the customers on request. There are many scenarios in which we might take snapshots in various daily use cases. We trigger the snapshots, which gives us a sense of security because we know we have this technology in place if something happens."
"We recently started using the volume encryption feature, which is helpful because there are some federal projects that require data at rest to be encrypted."
"The benefits of being on AFF are the phenomenal speed at which we're able to ingest data and index it, and the IOPS."
"Snapshots, snap clones, backups, flexibility, and agility are valuable features. I like that NetApp AFF is easy to use. We can automate everything for our backups and use cases. It's fast and simple, and provides storage to all of our VMware ESX hosts. It expands easily as well."
"It impacts customer retention because of its overall ease. When you are running a business, where time is a factor, that is the biggest selling point. Things happen really rapidly, when they happen, and being able to say, "Yeah, we can get this up and running in a day, if you want," or even less time in some cases. Sometimes, that can be what makes or breaks our case."
"The speed is great. That's probably number one in terms of features we appreciate."
"It also helps to accelerate databases in our environment. First of all, there is the reliability of things staying online and the small response time as well, from the MetroCluster, for all of the data that we're serving; and the applications are talking to the MetroCluster. It provides a very fast response time."
"The speed of data retrieval is the most valuable feature. We mostly use it for our SAP database and we are getting good IO from the hard drive."
"I think replication is one area that still needs improvement. Earlier, Pure Storage FlashArray only had IP-based replication. There was no API-based replication, but they have enhanced the feature now. However, they need to work on API replication for C-type of arrays."
"The GUI could improve, it could be more intuitive. There is hidden functionality."
"I want to learn more about command line usage which I have not explored much yet. However, there are many automated solutions for repetitive tasks. I would like to see additional features like performance monitoring, configuring of alerts, and the customization of alert thresholds in the next release."
"The file functionality could be better."
"There are many features which need to be added, particularly on the replication side."
"The price should be lower."
"In the configuration, which we brought in or tested it in, it has a very limited config as far as the array goes. That said, it still did more than our anticipation."
"The price could be better."
"This solution is now at end-of-life."
"The tool needs improvement in the utilization report at the granular level."
"There are issues formulating the upgraded disk."
"With 3PAR, there is remote copy software which isn't very good."
"Here in Algeria, we are facing a lot of trouble finding partners and getting support from HPE. There should be better support here in our country."
"While the stability is pretty good, it could always be improved upon."
"The interface could be improved to match the system."
"If HPE 3PAR could handle NAS and all things related to NAS, you would not need to have a mixture of different storages, storage boxes, one solution could fit all."
"It can get a little expensive if you need to add more disks. The cost is a pain point for us, especially in terms of expansion."
"There is room for improvement with the user interface. There are a few things that cannot be done in the GUI. We do a lot of things through the CLI, but that's grown out of a lack of ability to do them in the GUI. An example is QTrees. You can manage them within the GUI, but the GUI is missing a few options."
"NetApp should offer more training so everyone can learn about the products. Other vendors have a lot of training options. It would be great if NetApp would highlight how to use the features more so that every admin or person can gain more knowledge about this technology."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support. I have noticed that if I sometimes call their customer care for a particular issue, they will give me another number and ask me to call that other team. It would be better if they could do a warm transfer. That would save customers time from calling all the numbers again and speaking to another team."
"The size of NetApp could be better. They're always about 40 pounds without the hard drives in them, so it would be great if there's a way to make them smaller yet keep the functionality. That would reduce the physical footprint."
"It would be better if they just improved the performance of the system."
"We would like to have a feature that automatically moves volumes between aggregates, based on the performance. We normally need to do this manually."
"This is an expensive solution that could be cheaper."
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 8th in All-Flash Storage with 27 reviews while NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) is ranked 3rd in All-Flash Storage with 30 reviews. HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.4, while NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of HPE 3PAR StoreServ writes "Good mid-range storage and delivered to clients pre-setup but is rather expensive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) writes "Provides us with quick options when restoring things for customers". HPE 3PAR StoreServ is most compared with HPE Primera, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, HPE StorageWorks MSA and Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, whereas NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) is most compared with Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, Dell Unity XT, Dell PowerStore, HPE Nimble Storage and Lenovo ThinkSystem DE Series. See our HPE 3PAR StoreServ vs. NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) 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.
From what I understand of Gary’s response, can we assume that the HP 3PAR is more suitable for multi-site companies that require replication between sites, and that the Netapp is more suitable for local installations and is probably faster in terms of local backup and restore operations?
Either will after the maintenance period expires. They both offer 3,4 or 5 years upfront for maintenance and support. After that they will sting you big time for renewals.
If you have a lifecycle of say 4 years then get it upfront as there won't be any new charges due to replacements. Software wise is usually around 20% of the rrp price for annual renewal after the initial period of 3,4 or 5. Depends on the vendor.
The other part is how much your data is likely to grow as dedupe appliances such as store once and dell will charge a lot for upgrades. Again it's better to get more at the start to make sure your covered for the time frames you need.
Hope that all makes sense
Thanks you for your advise mate, any way let me know one things which one will give me the iceberg cost at the end of the day...? 3par with storeonce and switch or Netapp with additional third party storage back up let say from Dell server as storage to backup my data, app etc.
iIsee a lot of good comments on features of both Netapp and HP3Par, one important point to consider is that both these solutions offer some sort of point in time snapshots, snapvault,... these do not offer any cataloging features, A good backup solution includes a data base of backups for history. This is why you should also add either Data Protector, VEEM, Catalogic,. CommVault.,... the arrays themselves will do great snapshot recovery but without any information on the backups, the solution would be very limited.
Oh god I wondered when pure would raise its hand here. Seems to happen on every all flash post like they are desperate to sell systems.
I wouldn't touch pure they are struggling with sales against HP and EMC with xtremeIO systems. At a guess I would say they will get bought out soon by someone like Lenovo or another storage vendor.
However the topic here is HP vs NetApp and what's needed i would recommend staying on subject and not trying to promote other systems that haven't been asked about.
I would back the HP system here with data protector for backup. NetApp as someone else mentioned has big issues with their all flash hence why they bought an all flash competitor solid fire so that they have a proper all flash offering without WAFL
Hello, i am not familiar with 3Par storage but i can tell you great things about the PureStorage all-flash-arrays. We installed the FA-450 and an M50 and the performance is unbelievable!! Both pump through 200,000 32K IOPS. All redundant hardware and fantastic customer service.
Will there be any offsite replication ?
So if I understand what you're asking, you want to know if there is any
kind of premium to being able to back up the 3par array? The answer is no,
but there is software specifically available to do snapshots (Virtual Copy)
and for special direct-to-disk backup from a 3par to an HP StoreOnce
de-duplication appliance from Oracle or SQL Server. Feel free to call me if
you need further explanation.