We performed a comparison between NetApp NVMe AFF A800 and Pure FlashArray X NVMe based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two All-Flash Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The GUI is very easy to use and intuitive."
"The management features are well organized and they have a very good dashboard."
"The management is simple in Pure Storage FlashArray."
"It's simple, powerful, and ready to use."
"It is an easy to use product for all of my team members."
"The reliability is very good."
"Redundancy and the fault tolerance of the platform are the most impressive."
"The solution is very reliable."
"Over the eight years, we've been using NetApp with ONTAP, we've never lost a bit of data, and we've only experienced a few minutes of downtime in that entire time."
"You can easily scale up, and scale-out."
"The storage features are valuable."
"We find the product to be very flexible."
"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."
"During the use cases of the solution, its reliability and suitability are the best."
"The product can be scaled vertically as well as horizontally."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a product that is fast and provides a fast I/O."
"The high availability of the product is the most valuable feature."
"What I really like about this program, is that it is easy to use and easy to configurate."
"The duplication algorithm allows us to get a lot more use out of less storage. We're running a five terabyte array right now and we're running probably about 30 terabytes on it. So the duplication rate is pretty phenomenal, without a cost to performance. It still runs pretty smoothly."
"It is very easy to install and configure. It has got excellent diagnostics. If you really need to see how the box is performing, the console gives you a lot of information. You can set thresholds as well as alerts based on the thresholds, which is a very powerful functionality. They are very proactive. They know how to monitor and manage the systems. They see a problem, and they are all over it before us. They see the problem before we see it, which is very good."
"The Pure1 component is most valuable at this point in time when comparing it with EMC. Pure1 is where you can have your diagnostics in the cloud, so you can look at things from your mobile phone."
"We're able to get higher-density workloads on the same infrastructure, and we have a smaller physical footprint. The performance is excellent – during our test the bottlenecks are never on the X array, it just keeps picking up the pace to match what you need. The real-time visibility is a differentiator in my opinion."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe has low latency and high Ops. It is an evergreen model."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reliability."
"In the next release I would like to see integration into other third-party player providers like Google."
"Pricing could be better in comparison to other solutions."
"The GUI could improve, it could be more intuitive. There is hidden functionality."
"It is way in excess of what we need. If anything, we could see a bit more speed. I'm just comparing it with what some of my colleagues who are implementing their own systems do."
"In the next release of this solution, we would like to see automated copy data management for SQL Server."
"There was some complexity in the initial setup."
"A three wave application or multi wave application synchronization would be an improvement."
"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."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The product's performance has some shortcomings, making it an area that could be a little better."
"The product’s UI could be better."
"The support can take a few days to have a response. However, the response that we do receive is very informative."
"Increasing the RAM, and including physical cords would be beneficial."
"Stability is an area with a certain shortcoming where the solution needs to improve"
"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."
"In the next release, I would like to see real-time analytics for further insight into consumption models."
"We need better data deduplication."
"Our use cases require more multi-tenant capabilities and additional VLAN interfaces for separating different customers. We currently use it to provide storage, sometimes shared storage, to different customers, but it is less flexible in comparison to a dedicated solution."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"It is on the expensive side."
"It's more multi-tenant functionality in their Pure1 manage portal that is lacking."
"Right now, the box itself is just strictly working as a backend storage system. It would be fantastic if we could access it directly like a NAS device through network access or SIS drives. I think they have an interface, but I am not sure how good it is. If we could address a box directly on the network without having to go through a server, it would be great. The replication schemas could be improved. We are not using replication on the storage level right now. We use a different type of replication. If their replication would be as good as the one that we have, I would probably run the replication schema because it might be faster, but I don't know that for a fact. So, I cannot say that they have good replication. All I can say is that they need to inform us better."
"The software layer has to improve."
NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is ranked 17th in All-Flash Storage with 10 reviews while Pure FlashArray X NVMe is ranked 14th in All-Flash Storage with 27 reviews. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is rated 8.8, while Pure FlashArray X NVMe is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of NetApp NVMe AFF A800 writes "Very easy to manage, highly stable and offers robustness of the CLI, API, and GUI ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure FlashArray X NVMe writes "Works well, is easy to implement, and has upgrade analysis capabilities". NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, Huawei OceanStor Dorado, Dell PowerMax NVMe and Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, whereas Pure FlashArray X NVMe is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and Pure Storage FlashBlade. See our NetApp NVMe AFF A800 vs. Pure FlashArray X NVMe report.
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.
