We performed a comparison between HPE Alletra and NetApp AFF 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."It simplifies storage."
"One of the lesser sung advantages was when we started running our interface engine on Pure Storage. The ability to process messages and pass them through in our organization skyrocketed purely because of a disk that I owned which we were getting out of Pure Storage."
"We're getting good performance, and the compression ratio is also very good in Pure Storage FlashArray."
"Having fast storage allows actual servers to perform in high capacity so we don't have slowdowns on our applications."
"The performance and the ever-growing maintenance are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The management features are well organized and they have a very good dashboard."
"Redundancy and the fault tolerance of the platform are the most impressive."
"It worked flawlessly."
"It offers rich features and high speed for transferring data."
"The tool's notable feature is that we don't need to log a case directly with the vendor. The tool has access to all the logs on-premises. This is an on-premises solution. Additionally, we can provision data as thick or thin provisioned. Moreover, it includes data grid duplication and compression features."
"The most valuable features of AFF are its speed and the responsive support from NetApp."
"The most valuable features are the IO performance that we get, the cluster part, and the increased workload and performance with the SSDs."
"Easier to manage with the clustered system and everything with the newest ONTAP 9."
"If the AutoSupport is well configured, then you need not to do a monitoring. You will get call and mail when any issue is completed."
"The benefits of being on AFF are the phenomenal speed at which we're able to ingest data and index it, and the IOPS."
"Its efficiency and scalability are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature of NetApp AFF for us is its ability to manage multiple IP spaces for our customers in a shared environment."
"Even though the complete workload will fill out the AFF storage box, it will give us sustained stability."
"We would like to see better troubleshooting aspects. It helps us if we can find out where the problem is. Right now, it's difficult. Sometimes it's difficult to pinpoint the issue. If they had more visibility and more troubleshooting feature built into the tool that would really help."
"I would like to see data tiering to AWS."
"I'd like to see a move towards individual VMs for what the performance of each VM is in a VD infrastructure. I can see the overall volume, but I would love to see things in a more granular level on the VM side."
"Currently, the solution fails to support file screening."
"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."
"I would like to see support for NVMe, end-to-end."
"It would be nice if Pure had something in its portfolio that provided higher deduplication and compression for backups."
"The primary drawback is the cost, which can be prohibitive for small configurations."
"It would be better if there were an option to incorporate the NVMe feature alongside other storage tiers. Currently, the system operates on Autotier but can manually peer and mix different types of drives, such as SAS and SATA drives."
"We had some issues while installing it on our servers. It required more resources while cross-checking. So, the initial setup process could be better."
"It's a little behind on security. It's starting to get into multi-factor authentication, they just started to introduce it but not for all products."
"I would like to see if they could move the virtual storage machines. They have integrated a DR, so you can back to your DR, but there's no automated way to failover and failback. It's all manual. I'd like to see it all automated."
"They should make these features a little more affordable."
"There is no direct storage attachment available. Most configurations require additional switches for data access."
"The cost of this solution should be reduced."
"It has not reduced our data center costs. NetApp charges a pretty penny for their stuff."
"It would be very useful if we could do the NFS to CIFS file transfer, but it is not supported at this time."
"Offering the ability to actively write data on a single volume spanning multiple clusters is significant."
HPE Alletra is ranked 25th in All-Flash Storage with 2 reviews while NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in All-Flash Storage with 280 reviews. HPE Alletra is rated 9.0, while NetApp AFF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of HPE Alletra writes "Offers high-intensity IOPS for data operations and delivers extremely low latency for disk operations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". HPE Alletra is most compared with Dell PowerStore, HPE Primera, IBM FlashSystem, Dell PowerMax NVMe and HPE 3PAR StoreServ, whereas NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, VMware vSAN and NetApp FAS Series.
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.