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

NetApp E-Series vs NetApp NVMe AFF A800 comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 5, 2024

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
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
218
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (4th)
NetApp E-Series
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.0
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays (14th)
NetApp NVMe AFF A800
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (26th), NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays (8th)
 

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.
MB
IT-Techniker at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Have struggled with timely expert support and faced communication challenges during critical maintenance tasks
As an AZ3 technician with experience in that direction, when I call them, I do not call the first-level support as it is something I do not need. I call them because I am not able to resolve that mistake or when the behavior of the machine is not normal. If you need an auto support message from the customer machine, you can get them from the first level, but most of the time, they do not know what an auto support message is, and everything stops there. You have a few of them when you call, and when we are replacing something in NetApp E-Series. StorageGRID is different, but with NetApp E-Series, you need to grab information from the node that is actually down; in most cases, the node is not in loader. It is entirely gone. You can try to reseat it, maybe boot it up, but in most cases, when it is down, it stays down. You call support for that, and that is when you lose two or three hours.
Helder-Valente - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Director at affidea
Has improved data efficiency and application performance while supporting encryption and fast access to imaging workloads
We use it quite extensively because with this we have more space and the information can be read without wasting time. We are satisfied with this. The performance is quite good. We don't have any issues regarding the applications that use fat clients. It helps prevent being hacked, and so far we don't have any issues. We can do the encryption of the data. The solution performs quite well. It helps us maintain our systems. Since we have many applications that use images for streaming, it works exceptionally well. We don't have any issues, and this helps us with the service we provide to the hospital.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Reliability and performance are its most valuable feature."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support."
"The most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray is the all-flash storage performance, low latency, and efficiency of their de-duplication technology."
"Data deduplication is one feature I found to be the most valuable in the tool...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"It makes things ten times easier."
"Provides fast access and is user-friendly."
"I find Pure Storage FlashArray to be much better than traditional storage because it has a GUI interface. It makes the process of allocating the storage much easier, and most activities are automated. It is like clicking a button for every task."
"My customers are satisfied with the performance."
"The overall experience has been positive."
"Customers go for the E Series if they need backup storage because it is cheap."
"The Snapshot feature is actually widely used; it is a feature that only NetApp E-Series has and it is quite good."
"If we select the best use case for NetApp E-Series based on its intended purpose, I would rate it a ten."
"The product is easy to use."
"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."
"The most valuable features are stability and performance."
"The product can be scaled vertically as well as horizontally."
"The features I find most valuable in NetApp NVMe AFF A800 include the part of doing the tiering, NetApp NVMe AFF A800 has helped in enhancing my application performance, and in terms of metrics, I have observed that the latency with NetApp NVMe AFF A800 decreased significantly for us, with the response to read and write being faster, and we are satisfied with the applications."
"It's a very straightforward installation and implementation."
"Low latency is the most valuable feature."
"You can easily scale up, and scale-out."
"In summary, this is a good product, it is serving our purpose well, I am satisfied with it, and I absolutely recommend it for others."
 

Cons

"This product has only two active controllers, whereas other solutions can have more. This is something that needs to improve."
"We have not seen a reduction in our TCO nor have we seen ROI."
"We haven't seen ROI."
"Its price could be cheaper. It is not the cheapest one out there, but I'm not directly involved in the figures and negotiations."
"The only issue is the pricing. Because we have competition, our customers always take another brand and say they can save their investment."
"It falls far short of protocol support."
"I would like to see box-to-box encryption on replication included in the next release."
"The connectivity needs improvement. You do not have the possibility to have a file and block connectivity at the same time on the same machine. It has limited ability to do so."
"Getting through first level to second level takes two hours minimum."
"Though the performance is there, if NetApp wants to be competitive with the others, it must improve their business continuity."
"Regarding error handling in NetApp E-Series, because it is a cost-effective but not an intelligent storage solution, the error handling is not sufficient."
"The solution must provide more training courses."
"NetApp should add more production lines to the E series so we can make flexible solutions more easily."
"With NetApp E-Series, when we are running active-active NAS4, sometimes due to either an issue or a bug, we experience failures. At least twice yearly, we have seen this issue. When it occurs, we lose critical systems such as MQ."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"Sometimes, it takes a while to get somebody competent on the other end of the line. They do have engineers in multiple time zones around the world. However, their level-one support is not always the best."
"The cost of the solution is quite high."
"Stability is an area with a certain shortcoming where the solution needs to improve"
"The initial setup is complex."
"The cost of the solution is quite high. It would be ideal if they could adjust it so that it's a but less."
"Increasing the RAM, and including physical cords would be beneficial."
"For NVMe, the reporting and consolidation dashboard could be improved. The dashboard is not user-friendly. It should be more simplified."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is reasonable."
"In terms of other contemporary arrays, Pure is something you need to have a use case for, as it's not priced for you to buy one off-the-shelf. If you have a use case, heavy lift Oracle Databases, any type of noticeable virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI), or need low latency and high throughput, you should consider all-flash at least and probably Pure Storage."
"The licensing is $100,000."
"I don't know the exact cost but it's around $1,000."
"Our Evergreen Storage subscription is supposed to be good when we go to upgrade."
"There are no licensing fees aside from the support."
"When I last looked, the prices were reasonable, and we could get an excellent array for about $60,000."
"When you are paying more than you were paying for the storage space, you'd like the cost to be less. If they could get into the spinning disk kind of cost, that would be it."
"The price is reasonable for NetApp E-Series."
"The solution is expensive."
"There are licenses for the use of this solution, such as commercial licenses."
"Considering the requirements and the situation, I don't feel that this is an expensive product."
"I rate the product’s pricing a seven out of ten."
"Though NetApp NVMe AFF A800 may seem like a highly-priced product, it is not extremely expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions are best for your needs.
893,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Media Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business66
Midsize Enterprise36
Large Enterprise152
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise8
 

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 needs improvement with NetApp E-Series?
Regarding scalability, I think there is no problem. While there is always room for improvement in any product, to my ...
What is your primary use case for NetApp E-Series?
We sell NetApp E-Series as engineered machines like FlexPod, which is used where high throughput and native storage p...
What advice do you have for others considering NetApp E-Series?
I work with VMware products, including VMware server, ESXi, and my experience is on vCenter Server, ESXi, virtualizat...
What needs improvement with NetApp NVMe AFF A800?
For NVMe, the reporting and consolidation dashboard could be improved. The dashboard is not user-friendly. It should ...
What is your primary use case for NetApp NVMe AFF A800?
We continue with NetApp NVMe AFF A800. We are the client. It is used for storage and backup. Regarding equipment mode...
 

Also Known As

Pure Storage FlashArray
No data available
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp E-Series vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.