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

HPE 3PAR StoreServ vs Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 2, 2025

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

HPE 3PAR StoreServ
Ranking in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
304
Ranking in other categories
NAS (10th), All-Flash Storage (14th)
Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appl...
Ranking in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network)
9th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) category, the mindshare of HPE 3PAR StoreServ is 10.2%, up from 10.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance is 5.6%, up from 3.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
HPE 3PAR StoreServ10.2%
Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance5.6%
Other84.2%
Modular SAN (Storage Area Network)
 

Featured Reviews

CO
Information Systems & Security Administrator at a government with 501-1,000 employees
Ease of use in data center boosts resilience and infrastructure efficiency
I find the HPE 3PAR StoreServ valuable for its ease of use and resilience, which is beneficial. The main benefits I have seen from having HPE 3PAR StoreServ include its use at a small branch I managed for about three years with around 60 users. It operates effectively because it is an HPE product we use there. I have not experienced any significant issues besides occasional IT-related ones, such as local database problems. Since handing over the administration of the system to someone else and moving to another department, there have not been any issues. There are many features that exist but I haven't needed to try. Before moving out of that role in my organization, I knew it was a product I enjoyed working with for infrastructure purposes. After completing my new role, I intend to return to infrastructure.
RM
IT Consultant at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
A stable unified storage system that enables quick access to data
The main thing Oracle can improve is the cost. It would be better if Oracle opened up the system to enable integration with other vendors. Whether it's the database, application server, or storage appliance, they should make it easy to integrate them. They need to open up more to ensure that it can work in any environment and IT ecosystem.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We use for our tier one and two apps, so they can do failover, synchronous replication."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"It is easy to add drives. When you add drives into it, it automatically recognizes them and spins them up."
"The all-flash positions our organization for growth. If somebody comes to us who needs an application with performance, we have that already formulated."
"With the support that our organization has, I can talk to someone right away if I have an issue. It has been very good."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ has been stable."
"If there is a problem then the HPE facility will detect it and immediately contact me."
"We're hosting virtual infrastructure on the 3PAR storage and it's been very good for that."
"I like its storage capacity, quick access to the data, speed, and overall storage management."
 

Cons

"In the next release, I would like to see faster upgrades, where it's really transparent to our host and our end-users."
"With 3PAR, there is remote copy software which isn't very good."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ has limited flexibility in building replication solutions. There are limitations to the number of IOPS the system can do. It's not bad as it is doing its job. However, for the application, if you need a toolbox, you can build everything concerning periodic replication modes of synchronous or asynchronous three-site, four-site, with supported cascading which requires you to buy an IBM product. It also takes a few hours to one day to upgrade the system and sometimes; it takes more time because, in some HPE 3PAR StoreServ 20000 Storage, you have an eight-node system. If you do an upgrade, you do it node by node and every node might take more than an hour."
"The replicating software is pretty complicated. I probably would have put it on a sequence."
"This solution is becoming dated."
"The tool has low storage and low performance. This can be solved by adding more disco to the solution. The product’s pricing is also suited for enterprise businesses rather than smaller ones.I would like to see better performance, UI, and compatibility with other products in future releases."
"We had a minor error when we were configuring this system, which initially detracted from its overall stability."
"I'd really it to be able to interact with older 3PAR storage, and possibly even non-HPE. I would like to be able to pull stuff off of old things and bring it up to the standard that has been set, simply, quickly, and efficiently. That would be a really nice feature. Right now it is a big pain. It seems to work but we tend to get some latency behind."
"The main thing Oracle can improve is the cost. It would be better if Oracle opened up the system to enable integration with other vendors. Whether it's the database, application server, or storage appliance, they should make it easy to integrate them. They need to open up more to ensure that it can work in any environment and IT ecosystem."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have seen ROI. While the costs were quite high at the time of purchase for our environment, the ease of use and the fact that it hasn't failed all the time, working fine, that makes it worth buying."
"We had to go back and purchase iLO licenses and brocade switches for the flex fabric to have a complete solution."
"Its price is a bit high for adding another tree, but when we purchased it, it was okay with us. We had compared it with EMC and other solutions, and it was okay at that point in time. Our storage has a lifespan of seven to eight years. When you purchase it, you need to keep a headroom of around 40% to 50%. After three to four years, you generally plan for an upgrade. The price is not so bad today for two years or so, and within a year, I might find that I have to upgrade or increase the storage. This usually happens when there is a radical change or a new application has come that is consuming a lot of data, but generally, there is a plan for the amount of data that we generate and the storage upgrade."
"Our licensing cost are $32,000 annually."
"I rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten. It is expensive."
"To be more competitive, as customer, we need a more aggressive price that includes all the licenses available."
"It is reasonable. As compared to other solutions, it doesn't seem to be much different."
"This solution is expensive. We pay every year for support. It's a lump sum because we pay for data center support services, and everything is included in one."
"The price could be better. We have many competing products now like Huawei and Dell EMC, and these are slightly cheaper."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) solutions are best for your needs.
883,011 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user182013 - PeerSpot reviewer
Federal Civ/Intel Engineering Lead at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
May 1, 2015
Measuring Up: EMC XtremIO and HP 3PAR
Leading up to EMC World 2015, IT Central Station asked how I would compare EMC XtremIO and HP 3PAR. Until recently, the flash storage conversation in my organization and many others has centered on XtremIO and Pure Storage, the leaders of the all-flash array (AFA) space. To that end, I've written a…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Marketing Services Firm
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business73
Midsize Enterprise74
Large Enterprise170
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What's the difference between HPE 3PAR StoreServ and HPE Primera?
HPE Primera has many great features but one of the best is that it is very easy to deploy. From an overall perspective, it is reliable, easy to set up, stable, and offers quality block storage. All...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for HPE 3PAR StoreServ?
It is expensive, however, when we compare it to the features provided by HPE, the price-to-performance ratio is very good.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

HPE 3PAR Flash Storage, InServ, Storeserv, 3PAR Flash Storage, HP Enterprise Storage, 3PAR Flash Array, HP 3PAR Flash Storage
Sun ZFS Storage Appliance
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Just Energy, Latisys, team AG, DreamWorks, BlueShore Financial, Erasmus MC
Translational Genomics Research Institute, Nara Institute of Science and Technology, CyberSolutions Inc., Y-Telecom, First Alliance Bank Zambia Limited, AZ Sint-Jan Brugge-Oostende, Mutlinet Pakistan, TDC A/S, Digi-Key Corporation, Thurgau Cantonal Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about HPE 3PAR StoreServ vs. Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
883,011 professionals have used our research since 2012.