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

Everpure FlashBlade vs Hitachi Content Platform comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 4, 2026

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

Everpure FlashArray
Sponsored
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
226
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (4th)
Everpure FlashBlade
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (10th), Software Defined Storage (SDS) (8th), File and Object Storage (8th)
Hitachi Content Platform
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
File and Object Storage (15th)
 

Featured Reviews

Sowjanya MV - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at Wipro Limited
Has improved performance for mission-critical workloads and enabled seamless non-disruptive upgrades
The availability is 99.99%, which is the main factor any customer would need because their data should be available whenever they want to access it. This is one main critical thing. It is very easy to upgrade since Pure Storage FlashArray handles it well. Everything is non-disruptive now; previously, there were forklift shifts, but now that is not the case. Pure Storage FlashArray says no to forklift upgrades. Usually hardware requires downtime, but Pure Storage FlashArray has improved their footprint so that they are not asking for downtime; everything is just a non-disruptive activity, which is why customers are more inclined towards Pure Storage FlashArray. Customers want more of the models in their environment due to the performance they are giving, and everything is in one Pure1 Array console where we can view all the models on one page or just an orchestration tool. You don't miss anything; you have replication, notifications about replication, and details about which host groups replication is happening in and if that replication is successful or failed. On a daily basis, our purpose is to create volumes for infrastructure; our daily activities include creating volumes and mapping them to the host, doing any migrations from a VM, clearing the data stores, and carving the volumes to those VMs. One key factor is the data compression with a ratio of 5:1, focusing on space efficiency, inline deduplication, and the compression Pure Storage FlashArray works on; that is a major factor we can suggest to any customer. Analytical capabilities are crucial. Daily, we check the throughput and consumption, and Pure Storage FlashArray provides predictions for one year regarding usage. This prediction helps plan updates well ahead. For support, we just raise a case, and they follow up and get it done. There is also AI readiness, but with the model R2, we don't have much of that AI readiness. For others, we do have AI readiness that predicts capacity based on daily or monthly trends, enabling us to analyze how much space we need or if we need to expand the disk shelf. From an operational point of view, a good feature is that if you accidentally delete a volume, it will be retained in the destroyed state for the next twenty-four hours, which is not the same with any other vendor. I have worked in this storage domain for the past fifteen years, and this option is remarkable, benefiting any L1 or L2 engineer. Additionally, from a compliance perspective, Pure Storage FlashArray has REST APIs enabled. I have not explored automation much, but from a security standpoint, it is strong with encryption data. If you want to automate, you can easily integrate with all clouds and explore Pure Cloud for scheduling workloads, including volume creation. Customers find benefit in Pure Storage FlashArray's single management pane of glass due to the dual controller and active-active setup. If one of the controllers goes down, all workloads automatically shift to the other controller, ensuring their data is safe and accessible at all times. This is a highlighted feature that any customer desires because their data should always be accessible. For SAN workloads, we use Pure Storage FlashArray because for SAN FC fiber channel, we don't use it; we use NetApp for NAS activities. We have clearly split this, so SAN is for mission-critical applications, while network-attached storage handles file systems. This architecture helps us maximize the benefit from Pure Storage FlashArray due to the significant workloads from this giant retail client. From a footprint and energy consumption perspective, you can see energy consumption from the Pure1 storage portal on a daily basis, and it is very compact. The three models we use consume only three units, which is quite low. From a footprint and data center perspective, it doesn't occupy much space. As everything moves to cloud, there are requirements to avoid excess spending on data centers, and Pure Storage FlashArray is efficient in energy consumption and is environmentally friendly.
MikaelHellström - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at Regin Dalarna
Has handled backup storage needs reliably and supports seamless upgrades
In environments requiring high throughput and low latency, Pure Storage FlashBlade provides high throughput and normal latency, but we do not have any application that requires low latency right now, so the latency of three to five milliseconds is considered kind of high. Pure Storage FlashBlade's ability to integrate with enterprise applications is not important for us, as we only want to present an S3 bucket for our backup, which we have done, and it works very fast. We use the Purity software's data reduction techniques; we have a backup software that compresses everything before sending it to the S3 bucket, achieving a data reduction of 1.1 to one. I would recommend Pure Storage FlashBlade to other companies because it's a very fast and scalable solution for anyone who needs it. On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution an 8.
EB
Storage Enginner at BNP Paribas
Archive data reliably for years and have trusted support simplifying complex deployments
An application that can do the monitoring and reporting interface for Hitachi Content Platform would be beneficial. Hitachi Content Platform monitor or intelligent monitoring is known, and deployment of this was attempted, but it appears that Hitachi abandoned this project, so it is not in use. The potential of that application was great, but it does not cover everything. When Hitachi was asked about it, they indicated there is no application in the project they will start to develop for this purpose, and they redirected to Prometheus. They shared some Prometheus metrics that can be integrated with Grafana to get some metrics on Hitachi Content Platform, but having a dedicated interface from Hitachi itself would be great, similar to what other vendors provide. The upgrade process for Hitachi Content Platform is too long. When upgrading for just two mandatory versions, it took weeks because all nodes had to be restarted. A hardware support tool is necessary every time upgrading to another version, and it is not practical for the production environment. A large downtime must be predicted and the application team must be asked to stop and suspend their technical batches, which takes a lot of time to do.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is easy to scale. I'm running two environments right now, so I need to scale. I'm running a part technology. I've got an A-side and a B-side."
"I would highly recommend this solution; it has all the features we need and tests all the software solutions that are currently available and that will be available in the future."
"After the implementation, the time to run the process was reduced to minutes and it did not require any manual intervention from our DBAs."
"It allows engineers to focus on other things rather than doing the more manual tasks. It automates tasks, so the ease of use is extreme. It simplifies the storage."
"We noticed a dramatic increase in application performance when moving it from NetApp to Pure Storage."
"The performance and the ever-growing maintenance are the most valuable features of this solution."
"It is noticeably easier to manage than other appliances that we have."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. You simply plug it in and turn it on."
"The solution provides many controllers; more controllers lead to higher performance, and it is a unique feature provided by the product that other tools do not have."
"We haven't had any issues with it, it's easy to use, and the speed is incredible."
"I would rate Pure Storage FlashBlade a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features include the ease of implementation, ease of use and the speed that you can do backup and recovery on."
"If you are looking for a new storage array, Pure Storage is, what I call 'the new kids on the block' who don't need to pull legacy systems with it."
"The onboarding and integrated monitoring tools are pretty good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is performance."
"The solution is very easy to manage."
"The stability of the solution is very good."
"The way that they handle the DR is very good because when there is a failover, it is seamless to the users."
"Regarding technical support for Hitachi Content Platform, there is a SAM who can push and escalate problems quickly for resolution."
"Integrating Hitachi Content Platform with existing systems is not challenging."
"Other than that, everything is perfect."
"The Hitachi Content Platform is a stable and reliable solution."
"Feature-wise, it has a lot of features. The most valuable features include de-duplication, encryption, version controlling, support, and tamper-proof data."
"The most valuable feature is the retention log, and the way that they handle the DR is very good because when there is a failover, it is seamless to the users."
 

Cons

"The only time that we had problems with it was that there was a bug in the VVol implementation but, outside of that, it has been flawless."
"The technical support is okay, but could be improved."
"I'd like to see a move towards individual VMs for what the performance of each VM is in a VD infrastructure. I can see the overall volume, but I would love to see things in a more granular level on the VM side."
"I would like to see active replication. I know that it's available now but I haven't tried it yet."
"Pure Storage FlashArray could improve some aspects. There are certain features that are good and there are some features that I see some issues with at the technical level. Those issues are related to replication. They need to resolve those issues, which I have already highlighted to the Pure team. Additionally, there are some issues in the active cluster that could improve."
"I would like some form of QoS implemented. As a service provider, it would be beneficial to have it."
"The solution needs an integrated NAS platform, file platform."
"In the next release I would like to see integration into other third-party player providers like Google."
"I would like to see the licensing fees improved as well as the price per terabyte."
"In the realm of micro-services, I think that Pure Storage can do well if they start getting in there and making their arrays more micro-services ready."
"In terms of scalability, it doesn't expand out quite as robustly as some of the others, but it covers 90% of the market in what it does."
"I would like to see more monitoring capability included in the next release of this solution."
"The speed could be improved."
"I would like to see more deduplication."
"It would be nice if you could store file-based in the same box with the same technology."
"I would like to see more VM-Aware features in the next release of this solution."
"The user interface isn't as user-friendly, and the management platform UI isn't as intuitive as others. So it can be more user-friendly."
"In terms of the customer support, I can say it's a mixed reaction depending on the country."
"There is room for improvement in the capacity for integration with other platforms."
"Two things that can be improved are pricing and configuration. Mostly the pricing is an issue. And if I were to add anything, I would say more integration with backup solutions such as Veeam Backup."
"The only thing is that it should be more cost effective."
"There is room for improvement in the capacity for integration with other platforms."
"When you want to replace a disk, we need to start the maintenance from the S nodes. We have to automate maintenance so any onsite engineer can replace it after that, but we don't need to do this on VSP platforms. An engineer can come in and replace that specific disk. If also we could do that on Hitachi Content Platform, it would be great for us."
"What is lacking in this solution is a simple process to migrate from existing systems."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing of Pure Storage is all-inclusive. It is very fair, and very easy. In comparison, Dell EMC has licensing that needs to be added if you wan to work in a complex environment or in specific functionalities."
"It is light years beyond anything else with the same price point."
"The pricing of Pure Storage FlashArray is reasonable."
"It was less expensive than some of the alternatives. It's not as though it was a premium price to get that kind of quality. It's a very competitive product from a price perspective..."
"The pricing is very attractive and it delivers performance for the money."
"It is cheaper than NetApp."
"Dell and Pure Storage offer competitive pricing, but Pure Storage might have a slight advantage."
"The price of Pure Storage FlashArray is expensive."
"The pricing is relatively expensive due to the FlashBlade technology. However, for companies needing quick and reliable data access, the cost is justified."
"The product is very expensive."
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
"In my opinion, we have paid the right price for the product. I don't think that it is too much or too little."
"Our licensing is renewed annually."
"It's a costly solution, but Pure Storage FlashBlade doesn't require additional licenses. All of the software is combined into one bundle."
"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."
"I rate the tool's pricing a seven to eight out of ten."
"The price of the Hitachi Content Platform is very high."
"Hitachi is more expensive than StorageGRID."
"I think the ROI for this solution is very good because the pricing for it is in between other solutions."
"Overall, it's costly."
"Pricing is comparable to other solutions in the market."
"The product’s cost is average."
"The pricing could be better."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.
896,387 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Government
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise37
Large Enterprise157
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise22
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

Which should I choose: HPE 3PAR StoreServ or Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series?
Both are great platforms, but if you are considering all flash solutions, I would recommend you to consider Pure Stor...
What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashArray?
I do not have any improvements at the moment; I like how it is. I have nothing to add about needed improvements.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashBlade?
Regarding pricing, it is okay; we needed exactly this in size, and the price was a lot lower than competitors, making...
What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?
In my opinion, one way Pure Storage FlashBlade can be improved is by having more compatibility between the FlashArray...
What is your primary use case for Pure Storage FlashBlade?
Currently, we are mostly using Pure Storage FlashBlade E, as it's the latest product that we bought, while we had a F...
What needs improvement with Hitachi Content Platform?
An application that can do the monitoring and reporting interface for Hitachi Content Platform would be beneficial. H...
What is your primary use case for Hitachi Content Platform?
Hitachi Content Platform's metadata search feature is not used in any case. It was only used in one tenant designed f...
What advice do you have for others considering Hitachi Content Platform?
Multitenancy is not understood or the term is not known in English. The overall review rating for this product is an ...
 

Also Known As

Pure Storage FlashArray
Pure Storage FlashBlade
HCP, Hitachi Vantara Content Platform, Hitachi Vantara HCP
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
ServiceNow, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Motorsport, Dominos, Man AHL
Rabobank, Xinhua News Agency, Kremsm'ller Industrieanlagenbau KG, KSC Commercial Internet, AIS Group, Shanghai Interactive Television Co. Ltd (SiTV), China Telecom, Spin Master
Find out what your peers are saying about Everpure FlashBlade vs. Hitachi Content Platform and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
896,387 professionals have used our research since 2012.