Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

HPE StoreVirtual vs Portworx Enterprise comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Pure Storage FlashBlade
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (12th), Software Defined Storage (SDS) (9th), File and Object Storage (8th)
HPE StoreVirtual
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined Storage (SDS) (19th)
Portworx Enterprise
Average Rating
9.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Software Defined Storage (3rd), Data Storage for Kubernetes (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

MikaelHellström - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at Regin Dalarna
Has handled backup storage needs reliably and supports seamless upgrades
In environments requiring high throughput and low latency, Pure Storage FlashBlade provides high throughput and normal latency, but we do not have any application that requires low latency right now, so the latency of three to five milliseconds is considered kind of high. Pure Storage FlashBlade's ability to integrate with enterprise applications is not important for us, as we only want to present an S3 bucket for our backup, which we have done, and it works very fast. We use the Purity software's data reduction techniques; we have a backup software that compresses everything before sending it to the S3 bucket, achieving a data reduction of 1.1 to one. I would recommend Pure Storage FlashBlade to other companies because it's a very fast and scalable solution for anyone who needs it. On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution an 8.
Vebjorn Nergaard - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior IT Engineer at Guard Automation AS
Reliable with helpful support and good replication
The setup is okay, however, it comes with a moderate amount of difficulty. If you are new to the product, it is difficult. You do get used to the process over time and it gets easier. A company just needs one person to maintain the solution as it just runs. You don't need any support staff. It's very, very hands-off except when you do updates. The product is living its own life.
Paulo Jose  Bosco Otto - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at PBOservicos-Informatica
A solution backed by strong customer support, that is stable and scalable
As a company managed in a Kubernetes environment, being trusted by a Kubernetes vendor, Red Hat creates barriers against using other certified solutions that work. Because IBM is a competitor of Pure Storage, things seem to be getting worse. I don't have plans to use Portworx Enterprise in the future because, at the moment, I am working with Ondat, and I have to follow NetApp's direction on that. When evaluating Portworx, one should make sure their company has already chosen Pure Storage. Still, if they are evaluating the solution on Ondat or Dell or other platforms, they should get a roadmap statement from Pure Storage, that they will continue to develop storage hardware diagnostics. I rate Portworx a nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The product is scalable and easy to expand."
"I like its size. It is smaller than the other competitors. We can plug in many blades, and we can have data up to one terabyte."
"FlashBlade offers low latency, high throughput, and seamless scalability."
"We have seen a reduction in the total cost of ownership by around 20%."
"Pure Storage FlashBlade's scalability is one of the most valuable features, and importantly, it always works, allowing for seamless upgrades."
"The solution provides many controllers."
"The most valuable features are the Metro clustering, and disaster recovery."
"The most valuable features of FlashBlade include its replication capabilities, reports, and easy allocation. Everything is user-friendly."
"he interface and the installation makes it easy as it's all in one piece of hardware and it doesn't need to be connected to anything else."
"Data is stored in two different places, leveraging more security and availability. Therefore, network problems are having less affect on iSCSI."
"The seamlessness behind the scenes of block management."
"The solution is very stable."
"The network RAID feature gives us maximum availability, since we cannot afford any downtime, even for a second."
"It allows compute and storage to operate separately, and has the ability to take SAN nodes out of production for maintenance with little effort and zero downtime."
"Simplicity of not having to buy FC or FCoE SAN. Instead, we buy servers with their own storage."
"The initial setup is straightforward, not a complex procedure."
"Portworx is a simple solution. It's similar to Pure Storage products. They're all easy to use and install. You need to have a little expertise with containers to use Portworx, but it will be no problem for you if you understand containers."
"I like that you have a small dedicated file system that is fast and resilient for containerized workloads."
"A custom IBM script is designed to tackle the storage management challenges within containerized environments, providing crucial data services and features required for enterprise applications."
"The best thing about Portworx is the Stork, they have called the VPS (Volume Replacement Strategy) and they also have topology awareness, and these are the three features I like."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"Portworx virtualizes the aspects of the underlying block storage. That is good because they can also use block storage for their future deployment instead of just NFS."
 

Cons

"On our dedupe during our initial buy, we were expecting a number a little higher like 4x. However, we are getting about 3.6. While it is close enough, it doesn't quite hit the numbers. So, this has been a challenge."
"I would also like to see better support for CIFS workloads."
"There could be improvements in public cloud integration."
"The features provided for SMB customers are limited."
"Compared to, for example, Hitachi NAS, the solution is not mature at all. It's just in its infancy as far as technology goes."
"They need better integration with public clouds along with a better hybrid solution."
"File storage needs a lot of improvement. Mainframe connectivity also needs improvement because it requires additional components to be integrated with Pure Storage FlashBlade. If you want to keep your backup data, then this becomes an even more expensive solution because Pure Storage FlashBlade will not be able to meet your backup needs."
"The documentational aspect of FlashBlade needs improvement."
"The initial setup could be simplified to make it easier for new users."
"The penalty for the availability is performance. So, you have to balance or choose between the availability and the performance."
"One of the areas that need improvement is the consolidated management platform, to manage all of the nodes from one place and the licensing around that."
"I would like to have this solution easily integrate with VMware."
"It is a costly solution."
"Hardware and disk failures are happening frequently."
"The GUI is a bit old-fashioned. It should be updated."
"In our country, Qatar, most of the industry isn't using too much HP. StoreVirtual doesn't move fast. It's not a popular product."
"They have not integrated Portworx with Ondat since they are too focused now on Pure Storage APIs and not on users like us."
"It would be highly advantageous to include an integrated backup solution within the same license, rather than purchasing backup separately."
"The documentation could be better."
"The integration has room for improvement."
"I think the vendor could provide more training for new users who may not be familiar with containers."
"I would like to see a more native mapping to mainframe-type systems."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our licensing is renewed annually."
"Pure Storage FlashBlade is a hardware appliance, and it's very expensive if you compare its price with other solutions. You can get the same features and benefits from its competitor, VAST Data, but for half the price of Pure Storage FlashBlade."
"The pricing for FlashBlade is between cheap and moderate."
"I rate the tool's pricing a seven to eight out of ten."
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."
"The price of this solution could be made more affordable."
"It's a costly solution, but Pure Storage FlashBlade doesn't require additional licenses. All of the software is combined into one bundle."
"One of the key features about it is that when you buy either a VSA license or a StoreVirtual appliance, all your software's included."
"For our organization, I believe the cost is 16,000 Euros for a three-year license. It costs a bit more to do the maintenance on our servers as well. It's also on an HP ProLiant server and an organization will need to do the maintenance there also. I believe the price for that is around 2000 Euros a year."
"If you buy a five-year license, not only does the technical support expire after five years, but you also lose the ability to change and expand the VSA, and the systems won't go down."
"It costs less than $10,000 for one machine. If it costs more than 15% higher than this, then the customer may change to another solution."
"Licensing is not exactly straightforward, but not the worst I have ever seen."
"The prices are OK, so we don't have much difficulty selling HPE in Brazil."
"I'm not sure how the licensing was broken out, but I don't think our offering of the Portworx was more than USD $20,000."
"It has two offerings. One is free, which is limited to only five nodes. The other is enterprise, which is a bit pricier."
"The price of Portworx Enterprise is high."
"The price is competitive, but it is too expensive when paired with Red Hat IBM."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions are best for your needs.
881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
7%
Marketing Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
12%
Media Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise21
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise19
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Pure Storage FlashBlade?
The tool's most valuable feature is its fast performance, especially in handling snapshots. It helps during power out...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashBlade?
Regarding pricing, it is okay; we needed exactly this in size, and the price was a lot lower than competitors, making...
What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?
In my opinion, one way Pure Storage FlashBlade can be improved is by having more compatibility between the FlashArray...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
HPE StoreVirtual, HPE VSA
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ServiceNow, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Motorsport, Dominos, Man AHL
NBrIX, WIND Telecom, Netrics
NIO, GE Digital, DreamWorks Animation, Lufthansa, beco, NEW CONTEXT
Find out what your peers are saying about HPE StoreVirtual vs. Portworx Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.