We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe and NetApp NVMe AFF A800 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Good performance with a user-friendly UI."
"A key feature is that compared to storage systems that we've been familiar with over decades, IBM simply does not fail. The reason is that IBM is the only manufacturer that engineers its own flash module, and there is a key architectural difference from everything else that we have seen in the market. The difference is that the flash module has the computational capability, which allows reliability and capacity enhancements to be uploaded from the main controllers and run in each module. So, each of the flash drives becomes its own little storage system, and that is extremely effective architecture. In this field, with this type of system, IBM has made a statement. They've never had one of these modules cause an outage. So, the failure rates on these things are just in a whole different universe from what we were accustomed to."
"The most valuable features are stability and performance."
"We find the product to be very flexible."
"NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is easier to use than some other solutions and the UI is very good to use for day-to-day activities. Overall, the solution has good technology."
"You can easily scale up, and scale-out."
"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."
"Deduplication and compression should be improved."
"The initial setup should be easier, and more like a plug-and-play approach."
"The support can take a few days to have a response. However, the response that we do receive is very informative."
"Increasing the RAM, and including physical cords would be beneficial."
"The cost of the solution is quite high. It would be ideal if they could adjust it so that it's a but less."
IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is ranked 20th in All-Flash Storage Arrays with 2 reviews while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is ranked 23rd in All-Flash Storage Arrays with 4 reviews. IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is rated 9.0, while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe writes "A game-changer product that doesn't fail, and as compared to the prior generation products, takes about 20% of space and uses about 85% less energy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp NVMe AFF A800 writes "Flexible and easy to use with a simple initial setup". IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell PowerMax NVMe, HPE Primera, IBM FlashSystem and Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform E Series, whereas NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell PowerMax NVMe, HPE Primera, Fungible Storage Cluster and Pure Storage FlashArray. See our IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 report.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage Arrays vendors, best All-Flash Storage Arrays vendors, and best NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays vendors.
We monitor all 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.
