We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe and NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays 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."
"Pure Storage is extremely reliable — it's never failed."
"It has improved my organization because now have lower latency, we get fewer complaints from customers, and we see a constant response time."
"The most valuable feature is how it simplifies the management of the SAN."
"The first set up we had was really straight forward and simple."
"The most valuable feature is its data reduction."
"Pure is simple to set up and manage on a day-to-day basis."
"On a scale of one to ten, where ten is the most comfortable pricing, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"There are many valuable features of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMele I have found to meet my needs. Specifically, the maintenance cycle is a standout feature of this solution. The main component of the IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is the maintenance of the batteries, which have a predetermined and reliable four-year life cycle. This is in stark contrast to other solutions that may use spinning disks, which can fail unexpectedly, causing unwanted downtime and maintenance. Having a predictable maintenance cycle is a significant advantage and has made this solution a preferred choice for me."
"It is a very stable solution."
"Good performance with a user-friendly UI."
"It's easy to use, has good stability, and many features."
"Its ease of use, performance, and hardware compression is very useful feature."
"The most valuable feature of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is the snapshot. We use it daily for all of the storage units."
"The high performance and high availability improved our overall processes."
"The storage serves the virtual environment. Most of our applications run in the virtual environment, and it serves nearly 30% of the bank's capacity."
"It provides multi-protocol, which is what gives the edge when it comes to big lineage PC workloads."
"Considering the cost, I find NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays to be the best storage available in the market."
"The hardware and software of NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays are easy for us to use."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"Rapid deployment, easy integration management and cloning of areas."
"The benefits are better up-time, better response time."
"This storage solution is both stable and scalable, and it works for our needs."
"Its performance is most valuable. This solution is much faster than other as well as older storage solutions. The performance of the system is very good. We are getting 50 times better experience than the older storages. We are using AFF 300. It also has native cloud integration and most of the features."
"Storage. There could be better storage."
"As long as they always improve on IOPS speed, that's all we're really looking for. The faster the storage can be the more we can do speed of application and speed of use."
"It is not possible to create a cluster on top of multiple arrays."
"I would like to see some improvements on the FlashBlade side around the CIFS space support. I am not super familiar with all the different NAS protocols that they run on their box, but there could be some improvements made on SMB CIFS side."
"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."
"A minor issue that comes to mind is that, every once in a while, a hard drive will go bad."
"It would be nice to have a better view of the allocated capacity on their Platform as a Service solution because we have to do some manual calculations to understand how much we are going to pay every month to use the storage that is allocated."
"The GUI could improve, it could be more intuitive. There is hidden functionality."
"The support could be better."
"IBM's support is not good. I experienced a big problem where I opened the console IBM Storage and would see that something was broken. I called the call centers, and I said, "I have a problem. My drive is not working." They want me to give them the serial number, I gave it to them and they told me "I cannot find your product. Your product is not here.""
"Deduplication and compression should be improved."
"The ZIO interface could be improved."
"Other vendors have included a block and file system. IBM doesn't include a file system. And yet, it's very necessary for all organizations' networks to have file systems. We have other systems for the file system, however, ideally, we would like to have one system with these features."
"In the future, the limitation is upgrading the same storage by adding a shelf to the desk. There is a limitation in the backend connection between the storage and extended shelf."
"I'd like to be able to connect to tape drives behind the storage device to back up the tape if need be. We have all of our storage running in all-flash, and we make a copy on tape. Currently, when we want to hook up tape drives, we have to add some extra equipment, which is a little bit complex. We want IBM to add a feature where we could install a tape into the storage so that we can connect it through a single pane of glass. We'd like to have a feature in the IBM flash storage system so that we can connect backup tape drives through the IBM storage system and we can manage the backup tape from the storage system."
"The solution's compression feature could be better."
"They could improve overall scalability through performance. Denser capacity, which is doable, it is what the competition is doing."
"It was difficult to implement and lacks some additional features that would be useful, but as a solution fits a particular need for our organization."
"The solution's technical support is not as good as it is supposed to be since you have to push them to get support."
"We have used IBM previously. We found that the storage from IBM was poor and we chose NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays because it can scale very easily."
"The pricing could be cheaper and it should have documentation in more languages, specifically, Russian."
"The management interface, while very reliable, it seems a little old now and could maybe use a little modernization."
"There could be an improvement when it comes to SLA support, it could be faster."
"I would like to have the ability to replicate data between All Flash and other NetApp storage systems."
More NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is ranked 13th in All-Flash Storage with 19 reviews while NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays is ranked 23rd in All-Flash Storage with 38 reviews. IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is rated 8.8, while NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe writes "Steady performance, responsive support, and high availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays writes "A storage solution that offers great stability, resilience, and support". IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, IBM FlashSystem and HPE Primera, whereas NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays is most compared with NetApp AFF, Dell PowerStore, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, Huawei OceanStor Dorado and HPE Primera. See our IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe vs. NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays 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.
