We performed a comparison between HPE 3PAR StoreServ and NetApp NVMe AFF A800 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 compression and deduplication features help to make the best use of the capacity."
"Support has been helpful."
"It's extremely stable and has good performance."
"Technical support is good."
"It is an SSD array that has awesome performance, low submillisecond latency, and does what it is supposed to do. It just works, which is difficult for things to do anymore."
"The amount of throughput that we're getting is really nice."
"This solution has improved our organization in the way that we used to see latency but now with this solution we don't. It also has good performance. Latencies have come down for our performance in the SQL databases. We can put a lot more in a lot less in terms of space savings. We also save data center space have good deduplication."
"It helps to simplify storage because it has an easy front-end to access everything."
"This is a stable solution."
"Previously, we were using EVA from HPE. When we moved to 3PAR, we noticed a reduction in footprint, reduced by more than 30%. We use the Adaptive Optimization, giving us a reduction in cost and with better performance."
"The remote copy group failover is very useful and has helped us."
"It's reliable and it's fast."
"It is a stable solution."
"The new StoreServ Management Console (SSMC) tool is more user-friendly."
"We use all the features, but some of the most valuable are the replication, priority optimization, provisioning, and deduplication. There are a lot of good features in this product."
"We have much better performance than we managed earlier and are now saving lots of space."
"Low latency is the most valuable feature."
"We find the product to be very flexible."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a product that is fast and provides a fast I/O."
"Over the eight years, we've been using NetApp with ONTAP, we've never lost a bit of data, and we've only experienced a few minutes of downtime in that entire time."
"During the use cases of the solution, its reliability and suitability are the best."
"You can easily scale up, and scale-out."
"The storage features are valuable."
"The most valuable features are stability and performance."
"Most of our upgrades have not been as smooth as they should have been."
"I would like some performance analytics which go deeper than today. It should be specific to some hosts and applications. This would be good."
"I’d love to view the average, minimum and maximum performance in the reports (Analysis tab - Performance) but it is only graphics and you need to export data in CSV to find this information."
"In the next release I would like to see integration into other third-party player providers like Google."
"The price of the solution can improve."
"It's not so scalable. It's got moderate scaling capabilities right now. The clustering technology needs a bit of work, they need to improve that."
"The time-to-market could be better at times, but I think that's true for all vendors of hardware."
"As partners, we should have the option to download the software, rather than have to go back through Pure to obtain it."
"The solution lacks reliability."
"The price of this solution should be lower."
"We would like to see a bigger integration with the Nimble Storage solution, so we can take our smaller regional companies and be able to send them into our bigger data centers and have everything work seamlessly."
"In the next release, I would like to see faster upgrades, where it's really transparent to our host and our end-users."
"The replicating software is pretty complicated. I probably would have put it on a sequence."
"A lot of tasks, you have to manually set up. They need to already have them set up and working. Then, you can just go in and tweak them if you need to."
"I would like to see NVMe support, not only on the disk side, but also in the NVMe over Fibre Channel."
"I give it an eight because of the support, that I can't get support in my country. This is the worst part. Support cannot be sold until we are out of the sanctions."
"The product's performance has some shortcomings, making it an area that could be a little better."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"The product’s UI could be better."
"Stability is an area with a certain shortcoming where the solution needs to improve"
"The support can take a few days to have a response. However, the response that we do receive is very informative."
"The initial setup should be easier, and more like a plug-and-play approach."
"The initial setup is complex."
"Increasing the RAM, and including physical cords would be beneficial."
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 9th in All-Flash Storage with 299 reviews while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is ranked 17th in All-Flash Storage with 10 reviews. HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.6, while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is rated 8.8. 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 NetApp NVMe AFF A800 writes "Very easy to manage, highly stable and offers robustness of the CLI, API, and GUI ". HPE 3PAR StoreServ is most compared with HPE Primera, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, NetApp AFF and HPE StoreOnce, whereas NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, Huawei OceanStor Dorado, Dell PowerMax NVMe and Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform. See our HPE 3PAR StoreServ vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 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.