Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more
2020-09-27T04:09:55Z
Miriam Tover - PeerSpot reviewer
Service Delivery Manager at PeerSpot (formerly IT Central Station)
  • 0
  • 4

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM System Storage DS5000 Series?

Hi,

We all know it's really hard to get good pricing and cost information.

Please share what you can so you can help your peers.

3
PeerSpot user
3 Answers
TN
Network Security Specialist at a healthcare company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 10
2020-10-15T11:35:10Z
15 October 20

The pricing is very costly. It's roughly $6,000-$7,000. The solution is not cheap.

Suat Ozturk - PeerSpot reviewer
Linux System Administrator at IThinka
Real User
Top 10
2020-10-13T07:21:38Z
13 October 20

With the Turkish currency, it's hard to nail down the exact pricing. It fluctuates and the costs are based on the US dollar. Right now, it's fluctuating so much, you can't really do a comparison using the Turkish lira. That said, I would estimate that the cost is a bit lower compared to other models.

GB
NAS Storage Tech Leader at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
2020-09-27T04:09:55Z
27 September 20

Its price is fair. IBM is quite fair in price when you compare it with others. We also use Hitachi internally, and Hitachi is always a little bit more expensive. NetApp is also a bit more expensive. So, IBM has good positioning in terms of price.

Learn what your peers think about IBM System Storage DS5000 Series. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
632,539 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Related Questions
Miriam Tover - PeerSpot reviewer
Service Delivery Manager at PeerSpot (formerly IT Central Station)
Oct 15, 2020
Hi Everyone, What do you like most about IBM System Storage DS5000 Series? Thanks for sharing your thoughts with the community!
2 out of 3 answers
GB
NAS Storage Tech Leader at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
27 September 20
The stability and performance of the drive are the most valuable.
Suat Ozturk - PeerSpot reviewer
Linux System Administrator at IThinka
13 October 20
The stability is excellent.
Rony_Sklar - PeerSpot reviewer
Community Manager at PeerSpot (formerly IT Central Station)
May 27, 2021
What are the major benefits of SAN that result in businesses choosing it over NAS? Do you think SAN is generally better than NAS, or is it just a dependent on the use case?
See 2 answers
RG
Business Development Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
27 July 20
It is dependent on use case. Generally NAS is used to store file level data and SAN is used to store block level data. Like for storing data like word Excel files NAS is used and SAN is used to store data from database applications. There are unified storages to store both file and block level data. Also SAN has more better bandwidth and better performance due to connectivity like fibre up to 32 Gbps and NAS has connectivity on network or LAN up to 10Gbps.
ST
Cloud Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
27 May 21
NAS has no upfront investments, you can use standard NICs in your servers, segment NAS traffic etc... and you  might want to reuse your current switch infra. Still it is recommended to use a separate from LAN infra and use a larger MTU size (for jumbo frames). In the past , the density of VMs on a NAS solution compared to the SAN , for a given latency was lower.  SAN has by default network isolation as it uses seperate from LAN ,SAN switches. It comes at a higher cost however and Server HBAs are more expensive. One does require the skillset, as the Fabric OS and its flow control mechanism is quite different from managing Cisco/HP/Juniper switches. FC SAN is considered faster, and due to the higher initial costs, tends to be seen at most at larger organisations, likely taking up 80% or more of the storage infra in those organsitations. Currently for some use cases S3 object Storage is changing the game. Traditional SANs for backups (especially longterm archived data) are now loosing ground in favour of S3 Object Storage.  VMware : NFS 4.1 does not support Storage DRS, there is no support for Site Recovery Manager (NFS3 does) , no Storage IO Control. One of the most significant changes in v4.1 was adding multipath, by introducing better performance and availability through load balancing and multipathing.  Historically, SAN was the native initial VMware platform, and the so called VAAI primitives were initially only avaialble on SAN Storage Arrays. Thats why FC SAN is the traditional storage platform for VMware. After some time NAS stood up, and closed the gaps (Mainly Netapp did) , but the use case for a NAS is CIFS/SMB and NFS services for the applications and not to run VMs on NFS volumes. Some microsoft clusters modes, are not operable on a NAS solution as well.   
Download Free Report
Download our free IBM System Storage DS5000 Series Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
DOWNLOAD NOW
632,539 professionals have used our research since 2012.