No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

NetApp AFF vs Oracle FS1 Flash Storage System 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

Everpure FlashArray
Sponsored
Ranking in All-Flash Storage
4th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
218
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
NetApp AFF
Ranking in All-Flash Storage
2nd
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
314
Ranking in other categories
NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays (2nd)
Oracle FS1 Flash Storage Sy...
Ranking in All-Flash Storage
34th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.4
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise SAN (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the All-Flash Storage category, the mindshare of Everpure FlashArray is 7.5%, up from 6.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp AFF is 8.3%, down from 9.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle FS1 Flash Storage System is 0.6%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
All-Flash Storage Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
NetApp AFF8.3%
Everpure FlashArray7.5%
Oracle FS1 Flash Storage System0.6%
Other83.6%
All-Flash Storage
 

Featured Reviews

Sowjanya MV - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at Wipro Limited
Has improved performance for mission-critical workloads and enabled seamless non-disruptive upgrades
The availability is 99.99%, which is the main factor any customer would need because their data should be available whenever they want to access it. This is one main critical thing. It is very easy to upgrade since Pure Storage FlashArray handles it well. Everything is non-disruptive now; previously, there were forklift shifts, but now that is not the case. Pure Storage FlashArray says no to forklift upgrades. Usually hardware requires downtime, but Pure Storage FlashArray has improved their footprint so that they are not asking for downtime; everything is just a non-disruptive activity, which is why customers are more inclined towards Pure Storage FlashArray. Customers want more of the models in their environment due to the performance they are giving, and everything is in one Pure1 Array console where we can view all the models on one page or just an orchestration tool. You don't miss anything; you have replication, notifications about replication, and details about which host groups replication is happening in and if that replication is successful or failed. On a daily basis, our purpose is to create volumes for infrastructure; our daily activities include creating volumes and mapping them to the host, doing any migrations from a VM, clearing the data stores, and carving the volumes to those VMs. One key factor is the data compression with a ratio of 5:1, focusing on space efficiency, inline deduplication, and the compression Pure Storage FlashArray works on; that is a major factor we can suggest to any customer. Analytical capabilities are crucial. Daily, we check the throughput and consumption, and Pure Storage FlashArray provides predictions for one year regarding usage. This prediction helps plan updates well ahead. For support, we just raise a case, and they follow up and get it done. There is also AI readiness, but with the model R2, we don't have much of that AI readiness. For others, we do have AI readiness that predicts capacity based on daily or monthly trends, enabling us to analyze how much space we need or if we need to expand the disk shelf. From an operational point of view, a good feature is that if you accidentally delete a volume, it will be retained in the destroyed state for the next twenty-four hours, which is not the same with any other vendor. I have worked in this storage domain for the past fifteen years, and this option is remarkable, benefiting any L1 or L2 engineer. Additionally, from a compliance perspective, Pure Storage FlashArray has REST APIs enabled. I have not explored automation much, but from a security standpoint, it is strong with encryption data. If you want to automate, you can easily integrate with all clouds and explore Pure Cloud for scheduling workloads, including volume creation. Customers find benefit in Pure Storage FlashArray's single management pane of glass due to the dual controller and active-active setup. If one of the controllers goes down, all workloads automatically shift to the other controller, ensuring their data is safe and accessible at all times. This is a highlighted feature that any customer desires because their data should always be accessible. For SAN workloads, we use Pure Storage FlashArray because for SAN FC fiber channel, we don't use it; we use NetApp for NAS activities. We have clearly split this, so SAN is for mission-critical applications, while network-attached storage handles file systems. This architecture helps us maximize the benefit from Pure Storage FlashArray due to the significant workloads from this giant retail client. From a footprint and energy consumption perspective, you can see energy consumption from the Pure1 storage portal on a daily basis, and it is very compact. The three models we use consume only three units, which is quite low. From a footprint and data center perspective, it doesn't occupy much space. As everything moves to cloud, there are requirements to avoid excess spending on data centers, and Pure Storage FlashArray is efficient in energy consumption and is environmentally friendly.
KennethEtsula - PeerSpot reviewer
Presales Manager at Spartec
Offers seamless installation and efficient data handling with robust support
NetApp AFF provides an all-flash storage solution for unified SAN solutions, supporting both SAN and NAS functionalities. Data reduction capabilities such as deduplication, compression, and compaction are standard features included with the license in NetApp AFF. With the storage efficiency from a NetApp AFF installation, users can manage substantial data running on all-flash. The features such as compaction and compression provide storage efficiency guarantees in an all-flash environment.
reviewer1221969 - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Head with 51-200 employees
Has a fantastic feature-set and works well with workflow solutions
I would suggest, if you heavily depend on the Oracle solution from the database you should consider Oracle All-Flash because, from my understanding, it is from a single OEM, it's a single solution. It would be a homogeneous environment. I think it would be definitely a better option for customers considering other all-flash storages. It would be better if you consider a solution from Oracle, from the database studio, the storage part. I would rate it an eight out of ten. To make it a perfect ten, in the next release, I would like for it to be NVMe compliant storage.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is very easy to use."
"The money I saved by not renewing maintenance on the Dell EMC devices paid for the Pure Storage devices."
"Lone segmentation is simpler and more agile. It's improved the velocity in overall provisioning from project to operation."
"The most valuable feature is that maintenance is free."
"The reliability is very good."
"If you need faster storage and a good product, this is the one you should go ahead with."
"The most valuable feature is replication."
"It reduces space and the polar consumption. It also accelerates the application."
"Speed. it's very performance designed. It's designed to have a lot of high speed."
"This solution's stability is good, and we have not had any issues."
"The scale up version of it is the most valuable feature. You can go to 24 nodes, which is very cool."
"We have never had a single fault in the 10 years we've been using it."
"It's helping to leverage data. The storage is being utilized to implement larger, complex file sizes."
"Support is definitely good, knowledgeable, and responsive."
"The newest version of ONTAP has a bit of a learning curve because you need to learn where things are to find them. It is not impossible, but when you are accustomed to the older version of ONTAP, it just takes a bit getting used to it, but it is about the same as before."
"It impacts customer retention because of its overall ease. When you are running a business, where time is a factor, that is the biggest selling point. Things happen really rapidly, when they happen, and being able to say, "Yeah, we can get this up and running in a day, if you want," or even less time in some cases. Sometimes, that can be what makes or breaks our case."
"I would suggest, if you heavily depend on the Oracle solution from the database you should consider Oracle All-Flash because, from my understanding, it is from a single OEM, it's a single solution."
"It's actually shaking hands with the workflow solutions much better than any other storage."
 

Cons

"We need to add more storage in Pure Storage FlashArray with the cluster mode activated for us to have better performance."
"Pure will probably have to move to other layers of the stack, not only storage but, maybe, hyperconverged."
"The price could be better."
"There was some complexity in the initial setup."
"In some cases, we get into very in-depth conversations around movement of specific data and, what's more, chunk sizes. The documentation lacked any description or information on that."
"I had to contact customer support when a drive failed as I was doing a couple of OS upgrades."
"We would like to integrate it more with our backup solutions."
"The only issue is the pricing. Because we have competition, our customers always take another brand and say they can save their investment."
"That's what we run into a lot. Our datacenters have a need for more flexible cabling and NetApp has very strict guidelines on what kind of cables you use."
"I need faster Fibre Channel over Ethernet. They top out at 10GBs today and I would like that to go to 40 or 100."
"Specifically, the current pricing bothers me; pricing is very high."
"Cleaning up false positives on alerts. We get a lot of those."
"It would be nice to have better integration between SRM and VMware, as I've had some issues with that."
"In terms of improvements, they could have a couple more things that are usually done through the command line."
"The part of flexibility that I can add more of growth, to enhance the solution."
"When we did our upgrade, if we could have done it without doing a whole migration; the migration was painful."
"Technical support, as a whole Oracle organization is very process-oriented. So sometimes it doesn't allow you to understand the customer's specific requirements because they have their own parts, practices, and policies."
"It has to be flexible according to the customer's requirements. It has to be aligned with the customer business and the business environment."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We lost a lot of customers because we couldn't compete on price with other vendors."
"The price of the solution is not expensive."
"When I last looked, the prices were reasonable, and we could get an excellent array for about $60,000."
"There is always room for negotiation."
"There are no licensing fees or other costs."
"Pure Storage FlashArray's pricing is very competitive."
"The cost has room for improvement."
"The price is reasonable."
"Our TCO decreased significantly because we were paying maintenance on nine different arrays throughout the country. We've condensed those down to three arrays, and our maintenance fees from the IBM product dropped by over a half million dollars a year, saving us $500,000 USD."
"Planning of all the lifecycle storage with NetApp AFF is part of the solution. While it is not cheap, they have introduced a new series of AFF that are more affordable, providing options for more users."
"The stability of AFF alone has been a significant ROI."
"NetApp AFF's pricing is competitive. It is not expensive or cheap. The tool's pricing is based on configurations and can cost around 150-160 dollars for 70 TB of storage."
"The pricing is pretty reasonable for what we get. But if you have to buy any more disk space, it can be quite expensive."
"I would like it to be a lot less expensive, but it's been a very good solution for us."
"I understand the cost is less than many other storages of same/similar performance benchmark."
"ATTO bridges add to the total cost of the system."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which All-Flash Storage solutions are best for your needs.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user186357 - PeerSpot reviewer
Solutions Architect with 51-200 employees
Jan 28, 2015
NetApp vs. XtremIO
Is there another storage platform as feature rich as NetApp FAS? I think it is fair to say that NetApp FAS running Clustered Data ONTAP is a very feature rich platform – the move to the clustered version of ONTAP has brought many next-generation features including Scale-out and Non-disruptive…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Construction Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business66
Midsize Enterprise36
Large Enterprise152
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business45
Midsize Enterprise47
Large Enterprise242
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which should I choose: HPE 3PAR StoreServ or Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series?
Both are great platforms, but if you are considering all flash solutions, I would recommend you to consider Pure Stor...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashArray?
The only issue is the pricing. Because we have competition, our customers always take another brand and say they can ...
What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashArray?
Our customers using Dell storage also use competing solutions. Our customers who have Everpure FlashArray may also ha...
What is the Biggest Difference Between Dell EMC Unity and NetApp AFF?
Well, Is one thing NetApp Storage has vs other brand is the mix of protocol CIFS with NFS booth working together in t...
What is the Biggest Difference Between Dell EMC Unity and NetApp AFF?
This question is very dependent on your requirements. Both are among the best in the field. Of course, the intended c...
What is the Biggest Difference Between Dell EMC Unity and NetApp AFF?
The answer depends on your needs and budget. If you want high performance (who doesn't) or let's say the latency matt...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Pure Storage FlashArray
NetApp All Flash FAS, NetApp AFF, NetApp Flash FAS
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
DreamWorks Animation, FICO, Yahoo! Japan
Enterprise Strategy Group, Groupe AGRICA, Keolis, Dragon Slayer Consultant
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Hewlett Packard Enterprise and others in All-Flash Storage. Updated: April 2026.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.