Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

NetApp FAS Series vs Oracle Pillar Axiom 600 [EOL] comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

NetApp FAS Series
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
100
Ranking in other categories
Deduplication Software (5th), NAS (3rd), Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) (1st)
Oracle Pillar Axiom 600 [EOL]
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

MC
Mar 12, 2024
Deduplication and compression give us more possibilities, and unified storage capabilities simplify administration
The product does improve our performance. It is scalable enough. For scalability, we've found that even if you have a three-year-old service... the way NetApp works, we must buy new equipment every five or six years. It's as if there's planned obsolescence... we don't have the option to upgrade the solution over a long period. So, for scalability, I'd give it an eight out of ten. There was one instance where we needed to add disks, but the filer was full. We ran out of space to physically add them. We had to buy extra equipment to support adding more disks to the filer when it reached maximum capacity.
it_user187272 - PeerSpot reviewer
Jul 17, 2017
Provides ease of use with a straightforward GUI. I would like to see better support.
Provides ease of use with a straightforward GUI I would like to see better support, with a one-off fix. The currently installed platform provided a number of hardware failures, but has since been resolved. Not sure if better tested code/hardware updates would avoid this in future. We experienced…

Quotes from Members

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

Pricing and Cost Advice

"NetApp FAS Series could be less expensive."
"Most storage vendors also have software, or licensing bundles, which may offer the required licenses considerably cheaper, but do also maybe offer licenses, which are not needed."
"NetApp FAS Series' pricing is competitive."
"The price, compared to competitors, is quite high."
"The process for going to cluster mode is expensive."
"There are products available in market with comparatively lower costs."
"It's not cheap, but at the same time, it's also inexpensive. It's somewhere in between."
"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with ten being expensive. We pay a one-time purchase price."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) solutions are best for your needs.
805,335 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
61%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
4%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
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?
The pricing depends on the disks we choose. We got quite a good price compared to Huawei Dorado because we compared the prices between NetApp SSD and Dorado, and the price was quite similar.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Pillar Axiom 600
 

Learn More

 

Overview

Information not available
 

Sample Customers

Children's Hospital Central California, Plex Systems, PDF PNI Digital Media, Denver Broncos, PDF KSM Legal, Clayton Companies, Virginia Community College
everis, Ukrtransgaz, Lamprell Energy Ltd., Abdelhadi Al-Qahtani and Sons Beverage Industry Ltd (AQS), cloudKleyer Frankfurt GmbH, Navis India Technologies Pvt. Ltd
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, IBM, Hewlett Packard Enterprise and others in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network). Updated: August 2024.
805,335 professionals have used our research since 2012.