We performed a comparison between HPE All-Flash Storage and NetApp AFF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is pretty much just plug and play. There is not that much to do with it. It is very easy to use."
"We were actually able to do multiple upgrades, including head upgrades and moving between the platforms, M20 and M50, over the years. We have never once lost a ping and have never had an outage due to an OS upgrade or a complete head upgrade."
"Having fast storage allows actual servers to perform in high capacity so we don't have slowdowns on our applications."
"Cost, racial per terabyte, and speed is why we chose PureStorage. It was no brainer."
"We also like the compactness, the small footprint. It takes up very little space in a data center and uses little power."
"It is noticeably easier to manage than other appliances that we have."
"The solution helps to simplify storage."
"The deduplication and compression rates are beyond impressive."
"The initial setup is easy compared to other vendors."
"The platform’s most valuable feature is the ability to process huge amounts of data."
"The solution is easily manageable."
"The most valuable feature of NetApp AFF is the reputation of the company."
"The most valuable features for AFF are the speed, durability, back up, the time, the workloads that we are using currently are much faster than what they used to be. We're getting a lot of different things out of All Flash."
"The Snapshot, SnapMirror, and SnapRestore functionalities."
"The solution’s thin provisioning has allowed us to add new applications without having to purchase additional storage. We use thin provisioning for everything. We use the deduplication compression functionality for all of our NetApps. If we weren't using thin provisioning, we'd probably have two to times more storage on our floor right now than we do today."
"The file-based protocol supports NFS and CIFS."
"The most valuable features are the performance and the storage efficiency, due to the compression and deduplication... The efficiency is very important because we can buy fewer disks for more data."
"The ease of use, the SnapMirror capabilities, the cloning, and the efficiencies are all good features."
"The NVMe flash cache is the most useful feature. It lowers transactional speed even more."
"The time-to-market could be better at times, but I think that's true for all vendors of hardware."
"In the next release I would like to see integration into other third-party player providers like Google."
"I can't see where they can make anything better, unless, of course, they lower their prices even more."
"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."
"The way Pure Storage does the controller storage warranty or replacement has been an issue for some people who just replace the controllers every couple of years, and that's where some of the confusion with pricing and support has come in. They should be clear on the way the controller replacements happen, as it is important to know whether or not you can get a good return on them, because it can be a little confusing."
"We would like more extended historical data to help with some of the capacity planning. This is something that we are asking for all the time. E.g., what was the historical performance of this particular volume? So, we would like more historicals."
"I would like some form of QoS implemented. As a service provider, it would be beneficial to have it."
"The file functionality could be better."
"The product’s ability to recover information and generate reports needs enhancement."
"The product is expensive. I rate the pricing a nine out of ten."
"The support, visibility, and reporting features must be improved."
"Stability could be improved."
"Higher communication: I love the professional services and I love everything that everyone's able to offer us, but I find sometimes we're not aware of all the things that NetApp can do."
"Technical support could use some improvement."
"Going forward, I would like improvement in the response latencies, capacity size, cache, and controller size."
"The monitor and performance need improvement. Right now we are using the active IQ OnCommand Unified Manager, but we also have to do the Grafana to do the performance and I hope we will be able to see the improvement of the active IQ in terms of the performance graph. It should also be more detailed."
"Tech support is a place where there is room to improve the product experience. The response time when they are busy is not very good."
"When it comes to the connectivity on the back end, where the hardware is concerned—the cabling and the like—it could also be simplified to ease the communication between the nodes and between the other components of the infrastructure. I still find that a little bit complicated."
"I would like to see aggregate level encryption in the next release. This is critical."
HPE All-Flash Storage is ranked 10th in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays with 3 reviews while NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays with 280 reviews. HPE All-Flash Storage is rated 9.0, while NetApp AFF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of HPE All-Flash Storage writes "Easily manageable, expandable, and provides high-capacity and high security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". HPE All-Flash Storage is most compared with , whereas NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, VMware vSAN and NetApp FAS Series. See our HPE All-Flash Storage vs. NetApp AFF report.
See our list of best NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays vendors.
We monitor all NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays 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.