We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem and Pure Storage FlashBlade 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."We have seen savings in our storage. The speed of deployment has gone from several days to a few minutes. This product has reduced that time into minutes, simplifying storage for us."
"It's just very easy for general block storage."
"One of the features that my customers are really interested in is immutable snapshots. There are immutable snapshots to which your applications can be reverted back if you are hit by some kind of ransomware threat or malicious attack. That's kind of a key deal, and it is one of the selling points I use to point out to my customers the value and the features that Pure Storage brings to the table."
"It allows engineers to focus on other things rather than doing the more manual tasks. It automates tasks, so the ease of use is extreme. It simplifies the storage."
"Pure Storage FlashArray's overall speed is its most valuable feature."
"The predictive performance analytics are good."
"It has good stability for our company."
"Non-disruptive upgrades: You can upgrade at anytime without worry."
"The most valuable feature is reliability."
"IBM FlashSystem is a flexible solution with plenty of features."
"The speed, performance, and stability are the best features of IBM FlashSystem."
"The initial customer technical support was efficient and effective."
"Most of the features for the reduction in data compression are useful. It is also very easy to use and administer. Its performance is also good."
"We are a 100% satisfied with the stability of the solution."
"Installing FlashSystem is very easy. It takes less than half an hour, and I can handle it all myself."
"The performance of the All-Flash System is very good. There is more enhanced performance and data production in the solution, which I appreciate."
"We have seen a reduction in the total cost of ownership by around 20%."
"It has also helped to simplify storage for us in the way that it's easy to manage. Their automatic monitoring really helps when things break or are about to break. They see a problem coming and alert us even before our own system does."
"The ease of deployment and management has helped us simplify our storage. We also do not have to worry about capacity management as much. A lot of these things are native to Pure Storage."
"Pure Storage FlashBlade is user-friendly. It's replication feature is great because it has active replication and active DR. That's the beauty of the product. It's a perfect solution for block storage."
"The solution provides many controllers."
"It's very easy-to-use."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and simple."
"It helps simplify our storage, because the user interface is very simple and the installation is easy."
"The 3PAR SSD arrays that we have are still failing a lot so even though we're under warranty, we still have to get someone out and usually have someone troubleshoot so that usually adds onto the cost. With Pure, we've had a disc fail and we pop it out and you pop it in and it's good to go."
"It took us a year to get it to stabilize and to get the best out of Pure."
"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."
"Having something native in the Pure Storage ecosystem would make it integrated and in one single company, and we wouldn't have to work with multiple organizations."
"I think replication is one area that still needs improvement. Earlier, Pure Storage FlashArray only had IP-based replication. There was no API-based replication, but they have enhanced the feature now. However, they need to work on API replication for C-type of arrays."
"I would like to migrate to the cloud in the future and know how that would actually work with this product."
"Automation could be simplified."
"We need to add more storage in Pure Storage FlashArray with the cluster mode activated for us to have better performance."
"The pricing could be improved, but I think it's getting better and better with each version. IBM needs to implement NAS storage again, as this is a big flaw. Dell EMC is very good at this and if you compared them based on NAS storage, Dell EMC would win right away. IBM's solution for NAS storage is very complicated. We don't have a storage box that provides file sharing from itself, we have to put software on it and go through a whole complicated process. It should be simplified."
"We use some open-source tools for monitoring, such as Grafana and it should be bundled along with IBM FlashSystem."
"Replication features need improvement. Currently, they are there in the product, but I'm not sure as to how it works exactly."
"The interface of this solution could be improved."
"The Data Reduction Pools (DRP) support could be better."
"If you want to expand, you cannot expand the disc enclosure. You have to buy a total individual node. Sometimes, this is difficult because we are just looking for capacity and not a node."
"The price is very costly."
"The solution is not able to replicate data in one-to-many scenario."
"I would like to have Snapshots and Snapmail in the next release. People who came from a NetApp background, especially expect these features."
"The solution is expensive."
"They need better integration with public clouds along with a better hybrid solution."
"There could be improvements in public cloud integration."
"There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."
"Compared to, for example, Hitachi NAS, the solution is not mature at all. It's just in its infancy as far as technology goes."
"The feature that we're waiting on is better integration with the cell services."
"The features provided for SMB customers are limited."
IBM FlashSystem is ranked 6th in All-Flash Storage with 106 reviews while Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 16th in All-Flash Storage with 30 reviews. IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2, while Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "A high-performing and scalable solution that improves data performance for S3 workloads". IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, NetApp AFF, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and HPE Nimble Storage, whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, MinIO, Red Hat Ceph Storage and Dell ECS. See our IBM FlashSystem vs. Pure Storage FlashBlade 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.