We performed a comparison between IBM XIV and NetApp FAS Series based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, IBM, Hewlett Packard Enterprise and others in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network)."Very easy to produce reporting data (Snaps). Very easy and fast for provisioning devices and Remote mirroring."
"Hands down, this is the easiest storage platform on the market to manage."
"IBM XIV's most valuable features are NVME, especially when it comes to de-duplication, compression, and responsiveness."
"Installation is amazingly easy."
"The performance and robustness of the systems are very good."
"As it spreads, a chuck of 1MB across the board means using all available spindles on the backend."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The most important features are SnapVault, Snapshots, and SnapMirror."
"It has a very good implementation of the Active Directory services, so implementation into a Windows network is easy."
"For us, the greatest aspect of the solution is the fact that it just runs. It is amazingly resilient. That's very important to us, because we are basically, with some exceptions, have a 24/7 operation."
"Has rock solid reliability and is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is SnapMirror."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable feature of the NetApp FAS Series is its stability."
"This product was not a good fit for our organization as we have a ton of latency sensitive applications and XIV was not able to keep up with IO + latency demand."
"The change form synchronous mirroring to asynchronous (and vice versa) without reconfiguration from scratch would be helpful."
"IBM XIV's scalability is adequate for our requirements, but because it's modular, you can't scale to larger requirements."
"I would rather have a web GUI served directly from the unit, and a CLI accessible directly through SSH."
"Until the drive is replaced, the pool_resizing is locked."
"I encountered stability (performance) issues during enclosure or disk rebuild. Also some power supply issues due to malfunctions of circuits. Sometimes "internal" Snap sessions hang and consume pool capacity."
"It could be more flexible in terms of configuration."
"Needs to add wizards for newer, inexperienced users."
"The biggest issue we face is parts delivery. There's no local warehouse in Myanmar, so if a customer encounters a technical problem like an IMEI issue, they have to wait a long time for replacement parts."
"It lacks automatic tiering, When you use data, some of it goes cold. It is not hot data, so the system should automatically move that data to the SATA, while the hot data is kept on tier-one, the SaaS or SSD drives."
"NetApp systems are somewhat more complex, though not excessively so. If you're transitioning from a Windows server environment to NetApp, get training or education; otherwise, you might struggle with this solution."
"No other area for improvement comes to mind other than its price. Making the price more attractive will help this solution have a bigger market share."
"The product should improve its user experience."
"We're supposed to have used NetApp FAS Series for replication, but then one of the nodes failed, and then it's taken us some time to bring it up."
IBM XIV is ranked 10th in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 6 reviews while NetApp FAS Series is ranked 1st in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 97 reviews. IBM XIV is rated 7.6, while NetApp FAS Series is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of IBM XIV writes "Using it behind the SAN volume controller, latency is predictable and it is reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp FAS Series writes "Offers good performance and ". IBM XIV is most compared with IBM FlashSystem, whereas NetApp FAS Series is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), NetApp AFF, HPE StorageWorks MSA, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and IBM FlashSystem.
See our list of best Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) vendors.
We monitor all Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) 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.
