We performed a comparison between Pure FlashArray X NVMe and SolidFire 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."We consume less physical storage because of the solution’s deduplication and compression."
"Access speed and power consumption are most valuable."
"It has improved my organization because now have lower latency, we get fewer complaints from customers, and we see a constant response time."
"Pure is simple to set up and manage on a day-to-day basis."
"The code upgrades are very smooth."
"We also like the compactness, the small footprint. It takes up very little space in a data center and uses little power."
"The most valuable feature is that maintenance is free."
"The data reduction technology part of the scalability has been impressive, like its ability to host additional workloads, volumes of data, and databases."
"The solution is very straightforward to set up."
"The initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward."
"Overall stability is very good. It is a very stable solution."
"The solution is scalable."
"One of the best features is the support, which is excellent."
"The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"The dashboard is such that you don't need to be a storage expert to administer it."
"Greater IOPS, speed, it's all-flash. So seeing that everything is going to all-flash, all SSDs, SolidFire fits right in there with the emerging trend in IT."
"It's got full API functionality and the performance is pretty steady."
"Overall performance of the solution."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its scalability."
"I would say in terms of architecture and in terms of functionality, the product is quite good."
"Being able to provide quality of service as promised."
"Having something native in the Pure Storage ecosystem would make it integrated and in one single company, and we wouldn't have to work with multiple organizations."
"With scalability, I have run into a little problem with our last upgrade. There were some undocumented limitations to the number of drives that our controller could run on. So, instead of putting in a new data pack as we had anticipated, we had to keep adding and removing to get up to the capacity that we needed to be. What should have been a one day process (or a few hours) turned into a month and a half process."
"They could improve the price."
"I would like to see the NAS add-on component become more fault-tolerant than just a single virtual machine running inside the array. I'm unwilling to use it for that reason."
"Storage. There could be better storage."
"The GUI could improve, it could be more intuitive. There is hidden functionality."
"Pure Storage FlashArray could improve by being more secure."
"The primary drawback is the cost, which can be prohibitive for small configurations."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"Every time I think of something that needs to improve, they're one step ahead, which I love. The only area I wish to see improve, I believe is coming, is in the FlashBlade product. Blade implementation fell short on a few of the services."
"It is on the expensive side."
"If the customer only needs 500 terabytes and doesn't care how much data they'll put in the server, IBM is cheaper than Pure."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing of the product."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"The software layer has to improve."
"We would like to see more visibility into garbage collection and CPU performance in the GUI."
"We have a large fiber channel infrastructure, and that's one area that we haven't seen implemented in SolidFire, its more iSCSI."
"The scalability of HCI or SolidFire as such isn't a concern, but when you compare it to PowerMax or NetApp AFF series devices, scalability is a concern because it's only the drives that are connected to the nodes. We don't have any shelf connectivity."
"The inclusion of more protocols and interfaces would make it easier to integrate with other products."
"SolidFire should start from two nodes instead of the four nodes. That's the only thing. In a lot of solutions, we have to use four nodes, that's the better thing. But as a starting point, two is better. That's why their starting point is expensive."
"It would be good to provide administrative access at the root level to be able to do things with the system, if need be."
"So feature-wise, I would say more reporting tools that could be merged into it."
"SolidFire could improve in terms of hardware robustness."
"We are looking for, potentially, on the Active IQ reporting side, to do reporting based on the datastore. Right now, I can report on the whole SolidFire, or I can report on just a certain datastore or a volume. I'd like to take all of my VDI infrastructure, which as an example would be multiple datastores."
Pure FlashArray X NVMe is ranked 13th in All-Flash Storage with 27 reviews while SolidFire is ranked 19th in All-Flash Storage with 33 reviews. Pure FlashArray X NVMe is rated 9.2, while SolidFire is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Pure FlashArray X NVMe writes "Works well, is easy to implement, and has upgrade analysis capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolidFire writes "A versatile storage solution suitable for various workloads in cloud environments providing scalable architecture, granular Quality of Service and consistent performance". Pure FlashArray X NVMe is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and Dell PowerMax NVMe, whereas SolidFire is most compared with NetApp AFF, Dell PowerStore and VMware vSAN. See our Pure FlashArray X NVMe vs. SolidFire report.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage 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.