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

NetApp FAS Series vs NetApp V-Series [EOL] comparison

 

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

NetApp FAS Series
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
111
Ranking in other categories
Deduplication Software (4th), NAS (3rd), Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) (1st)
NetApp V-Series [EOL]
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

Srikanth Purushothaman - PeerSpot reviewer
DIRECTOR at Vellore Online Systems
Has supported long-term data protection and backup while requiring better part availability and pricing options
For monitoring purposes, we normally use flash access storage exclusively. We utilize a hybrid system because we need performance, combining NL-SAS for the volume and SAS flash to use as a fast cache system that provides more IOPS. We normally implement RAID 10, which we prefer over RAID 6's n plus 2 combinations. We utilize it for data redundancy, even with write intensity on. Regarding the unified storage architecture for NetApp FAS Series, we normally opt for exclusivity unless budget constraints exist. Our IOPS are very high, reaching somewhere about 50k to 150k or 1.150k. The high performance ensures minimal latency. An advantage we've seen with NetApp FAS Series is that snapshots provide very rapid backup and fast recovery. We basically use snapshots for data protection as first-level protection, with deduplication between the two storages serving as second-level protection.
it_user487899 - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Administrator at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Flexible, allowing us to provide NAS and SAN solutions with the same hardware
According to my experience, for certain HPC environments, we encounter certain Memory/CPU limitations when we have a large number of IOPS. This is why, in order to support such loads, several cabs are required in parallel, complicating the configuration and administration. Another handicap is the management of the LACP that, when we are talking about environments with less than 20 calculation nodes, may not balance correctly despite setting the RR option.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Compression of the backup Oracle by RMAN on NFS saves space 5:1."
"With FAS and other NetApp tools, they make for a very intuitive solution."
"I sleep well at night because of its redundancy."
"Saves space with deduplication"
"The nice thing about FAS is that it has excelled at the first three points above for many years and the last point has been introduced with the On-Demand engine in cDOT 8.3 – there are plenty of arrays on the market that will be enabled for VVOLs, but they will not be able to claim efficient support for these features without massive re-engineering work."
"The performance allows me to provide backend storage for large number of VMs and databases at a competitive price point."
"Doing more with less. I can do multiple protocols, storage efficiency, data protection tool, everything is in one solution/ecosystems."
"I love those innovative healthcare data solutions that let me securely manage vast amounts of patient data (32.9 PB), use and share it enterprise-wide, and gain efficiency of scale through cloud solutions and virtualization."
"You have the ability to connect a third-party storage back end, EMC VMAX in our case, and have all NetApp functionalities available."
"We are very happy with this solution as it brings us the scalability and stability of Data Ontap and the versatility of NetApp solutions in order to provide different types of services for our customers' requirements (NAS, CIFS, FC / FCoE)."
 

Cons

"It's not a cheap system. It is very expensive. The pricing has been ridiculous every time that we had to renew the support."
"The product must support more drives."
"I’ve found that I use command line more often than I thought needed. Some things should be done in the GUI, and command-line switches can be overwhelming and take up a lot of time."
"The current snapshot technology in VMFS is to say the least very poor – best practice is to have no more than 2-3 snapshots in a chain (even though the maximum is 32) and to use no single snapshot for more than 24-72 hours – the reason is simple, storage performance will suffer if you create a snapshot on a VM."
"Migration from 7-Mode to Clustered Data ONTAP need improvement. It seems NetApp didn't know how to solve the main problem of migrating data from an old OS (7-Mode ) to Clustered."
"I would like to see an improvement in the licensing on Data Mirroring (SnapMirror) features."
"Installation of the additional switches and ETP could be improved."
"I think this kind of infrastructure is mostly obsolete."
"According to my experience, for certain HPC environments, we encounter certain Memory/CPU limitations when we have a large number of IOPS."
"We have had some performance issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a one-time license charge for NetApp FAS Series to run and we pay annually for upgrades and support."
"The only area that could be improved is to lower prices for their All Flash FAS."
"The pricing of NetApp FAS Series is not cheap, but in comparison to other vendors, NetApp FAS Series is affordable because they also have deduplication, compression, and inline compression. They focus on storage only, which is really good; it works."
"Cost effective storage for all performance levels (including all-flash)."
"The process for going to cluster mode is expensive."
"It's not cheap, but at the same time, it's also inexpensive. It's somewhere in between."
"The price it not low, but comparing features to other vendors, the price can be balanced."
"The price, compared to competitors, is quite high."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NAS solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business31
Midsize Enterprise38
Large Enterprise59
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which SAN product would you choose: IBM FlashSystem (FS9500) vs PureFlash Array/X NVMe vs PureFlash Array/XL NVMe?
Have you considered a NetApp FAS Storage for your NAS needs? I am sure it fits very well.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp FAS Series?
Regarding its pricing, I believe it is high. I utilize both HDD and SSD, where SSDs are more cost-friendly, yet HDDs are higher in cost, making it not very affordable but still useful. For general ...
What needs improvement with NetApp FAS Series?
Regarding improvements for NetApp FAS Series, I think everything is generally good. If there is a need to improve something, they can extend their support. Previously, in my company, I only saw Net...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Children's Hospital Central California, Plex Systems, PDF PNI Digital Media, Denver Broncos, PDF KSM Legal, Clayton Companies, Virginia Community College
City of Houston, Health Choice Network, SVC Bank, Plex Systems, Larsen & Toubro, IWD, JCVI
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, CTERA and others in NAS. Updated: August 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.