We performed a comparison between NetApp AFF and Pavilion HyperParallel Flash Array based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage."It has improved my organization because now have lower latency, we get fewer complaints from customers, and we see a constant response time."
"They are quite responsive and our local team was pretty good."
"The most valuable feature is replication."
"We're getting good performance, and the compression ratio is also very good in Pure Storage FlashArray."
"For us, the most valuable feature is the compression and deduplication. Being able to deploy a three to one ratio for storage is absolutely critical in today's world with the growing need for storage and the growing need for more space."
"Access speed and power consumption are most valuable."
"It has made working with storage as easy and simple as it should be."
"The initial setup was straightforward in the way that it was a database vacuum storage."
"We had some customers who were running virtualization workloads on classical spinning disks. We implemented an AFF system, and they got a huge performance boost out of it because the latency of the SSDs is simply much lower. Actually, most customers benefit from the improved latency and performance from the AFF systems."
"Organizations can reduce data storage footprint and lower power and cooling costs, helping to adopt "Green IT.""
"The speed of data retrieval is the most valuable feature. We mostly use it for our SAP database and we are getting good IO from the hard drive."
"The ease of use, the SnapMirror capabilities, the cloning, and the efficiencies are all good features."
"There are two compression technologies available within it, and they are valuable because they allow for significantly higher data storage capacity and the retention of a larger number of snapshots on the system."
"It also helps to accelerate databases in our environment. First of all, there is the reliability of things staying online and the small response time as well, from the MetroCluster, for all of the data that we're serving; and the applications are talking to the MetroCluster. It provides a very fast response time."
"The most important features are the IOPS and the ease of the ONTAP manageability."
"The ability to do SnapMirror or SnapVault for data resiliency and backup."
"We have been able to consolidate storage into Pavilion. Pavilions are our only SANs because it is a bring your own disk solution. When new drives come out, we are able to take out half of the drives in the system, put in new drives, move our VMs over to the new drives, take the other drives out, and populate those with new drives. Then, we are suddenly twice as dense as we were before. NVMe flash is only going to get denser and cheaper so we can make use of that every couple of years by just throwing newer disks into it at a fraction of the cost of a new SAN."
"The high performance is very valuable, as well as the enterprise reliability features."
"There's lots of flexibility in how we use the resources while also maintaining a small footprint."
"What it needs to do is work a little closer with solutions, like VMware, so it understands the particular workloads that are on it. Today, it does not understand the applications which are running against it."
"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."
"The solution could improve by having a multi-tenant feature."
"We would like to be able to connect to data tape for backup, specifically to the LTO backups."
"The only time that we had problems with it was that there was a bug in the VVol implementation but, outside of that, it has been flawless."
"They could improve the price."
"I would like the ability to swap out the network adapters into it. So, without taking out the whole controller, I would like to be able to swap adapters. This would make things easier."
"Pure Storage support could be a little better."
"We should be able to manage NetApp AFF as per the desired usage and needs."
"There are little things that need improvement. For example, if you are setting up a SnapMirror through the GUI, you are forced to change the destination name of the volume, and we like to keep the volume names the same."
"In terms of what needs improvement, I would like to see more consistency with the UI. It seems to change every few versions. The menus can be in a completely different place."
"The upgrade process could be a lot quicker, but it's still good as it is. The failovers and things like that are harder than expected."
"In terms of improvement, IO performance could use some enhancement."
"I would like to see if they could move the virtual storage machines. They have integrated a DR, so you can back to your DR, but there's no automated way to failover and failback. It's all manual. I'd like to see it all automated."
"One minor improvement could be making scale-up solutions with AFF more cost-effective compared to scale-out options."
"It would be helpful if the compatibility matrix was a bit better."
"I would like to see the management layer improved."
"In our current configuration, we can only run the line controllers in high availability, active-standby mode, whereas we would like to see active-active implemented."
"The rail system that Pavilion uses to mount up into a standard Dell or APC cabinet extends further back than normal rails, and they cover up the zero PDU slot. So, I don't like the rail system that comes with the device. That is my biggest complaint."
More Pavilion HyperParallel Flash Array Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in All-Flash Storage with 280 reviews while Pavilion HyperParallel Flash Array is ranked 32nd in All-Flash Storage. NetApp AFF is rated 9.0, while Pavilion HyperParallel Flash Array is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pavilion HyperParallel Flash Array writes "Good support, improves performance, scales well, and boosts team efficiency". NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, VMware vSAN and NetApp FAS Series, whereas Pavilion HyperParallel Flash Array is most compared with Pure FlashArray X NVMe.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors and best NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays 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.