IBM FlashSystem and HPE MSA compete in the data storage solutions category. IBM FlashSystem has the upper hand in terms of performance and features for demanding workloads, whereas HPE MSA provides a more budget-friendly option with essential features suitable for simpler storage needs.
Features: IBM FlashSystem is known for its high performance, low latency, and strong virtualization capabilities. It is suited for demanding workloads requiring robust performance and efficiency. HPE MSA, categorized as entry-level, offers solid stability with features such as dual controllers, tiering, and the ability to provide shared storage solutions without high complexity.
Room for Improvement: IBM FlashSystem users have pointed out the need for enhanced scalability, code stability, and more detailed GUI reporting. There is also a call for improved cloud service integration. For HPE MSA, users have noted the need for better scalability and more modern features like deduplication, as well as enhanced cloud integration options.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both IBM FlashSystem and HPE MSA are primarily installed on-premises. Some IBM users also manage hybrid or private cloud deployments. IBM FlashSystem receives mixed reviews regarding technical support, with some users praising their experience and others calling for improvement. HPE MSA is generally appreciated for responsive customer service but lacks in supporting new features.
Pricing and ROI: IBM FlashSystem is often perceived as a more expensive option, necessitating careful budget planning, yet offering significant ROI through comprehensive features and performance benefits. HPE MSA, while cost-effective, may still pose financial challenges for smaller businesses, providing a positive ROI as a budget-friendly solution, albeit with fewer advanced features compared to IBM FlashSystem.
It certainly shows a return on investment with HPE MSA, but we have framework contracts with special prices for the HP hardware, so I am not sure that our return on investment calculation corresponds to what other people should have.
The solution can comfortably be stretched from five to seven years without any failures, ensuring a long-lasting return.
We have seen return on investment compared to other OEMs, which took approximately three years after implementing IBM FlashSystem.
I would rate technical support a three out of five due to the lack of effectiveness in preventing recurring problems.
Customers of alternatives like Dell and Hitachi enjoy more reliable and comprehensive support services directly from vendors rather than third-party subsidiaries.
I rate the technical support from IBM as a ten.
IBM customer support is responsible, efficient, and responsive, though it is expensive.
It is more profitable to use HPE MSA because if you run out of space, you can expand the capacity of the array using expansion enclosures, making it more flexible and profitable.
HPE MSA's scalability benefits are notable as its speed and performance are good.
For larger enterprises, scalability is an issue as the price becomes prohibitive.
The problem arises when migrating data to a later IBM FlashSystem version due to issues with firmware compatibility.
The scalability of IBM FlashSystem is exceptional, and I rate it as a nine.
I faced issues with hard disk reliability, as they frequently fail and risk losing redundancy.
Customers have infrastructure that is 100% stable.
The firmware and software engine have fewer bugs, which enhances operational efficiency.
Data security features are more important to me than anything else, and I think HPE MSA lacks in this area.
If it could be a hybrid with SSDs and hard disks, then it would be more economical and efficient.
There is room for improvement in the troubleshooting part, specifically related to IBM Spectrum for Insight.
It is simple to use and manage via SVC, simple to configure.
An additional function that could be helpful is reducing the time it takes to delete volumes, especially if they are compressed or deduplicated.
The pricing of HPE MSA is not deemed reasonable.
The pricing is high; storage solutions are always expensive.
To install or upgrade any software features, the cost is high, which makes it challenging for smaller companies who do not require advanced features like deduplication or compression typically needed by larger organizations.
Compared to Huawei, however, I found that Huawei's processing power, performance, and cost were more advantageous.
In terms of disaster recovery, we can define global spares in HPE MSA. When one disk fails, a global spare is automatically allocated to that particular disk, which saves the data.
The most useful feature of HPE MSA is VAAI, which are the functions embedded in the system, allowing operations on the server or storage without using server CPU, making it easier.
There is a significant amount of data reduction, achieving a ratio of one to three.
The most valuable features are performance and reliability.
We have not encountered any issues with IBM FlashSystem's data reduction technology impacting performance.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| IBM FlashSystem | 13.0% |
| HPE MSA | 15.4% |
| Other | 71.6% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 11 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 11 |
| Large Enterprise | 7 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 47 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 21 |
| Large Enterprise | 59 |
Whether you need best-in-class performance or are looking to get the most capacity for your investment, MSA has a fast, affordable solution for you. And every MSA comes with an intuitive setup and management interface anyone can master.
IBM FlashSystem products are enterprise computer data storage systems that store data on flash memory chips. Unlike storage systems that use standard solid-state drives, IBM FlashSystem products incorporate custom hardware based on technology from the 2012 acquisition of Texas Memory Systems. This hardware provides performance, reliability, and efficiency benefits versus competitive offerings.
We monitor all Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) 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.
