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

IBM FlashSystem vs NetApp ASA comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Customer Service

No sentiment score available
Pure FlashArray X NVMe's customer service is praised for responsiveness and knowledge, but some users report challenges with communication and coordination.
Sentiment score
7.1
IBM FlashSystem's customer service is praised for responsiveness and expertise, but support quality varies by region with some needing improvement.
No sentiment score available
Rather than Pure just saying it's Cisco's problem, call Cisco, they actually got on with a TAC engineer and talked us through it.
The guys in South Africa, and they're very, very good.
What I like about Pure Storage technical support is that when you enter a request, you immediately get a response.
 

Room For Improvement

Sentiment score
5.2
Users seek improved pricing, UI, analytics, replication, deduplication, AI features, and better backup, while expressing concerns over costs.
Sentiment score
5.0
IBM FlashSystem needs improvements in installation, speed, security, integration, support, cost, scalability, storage features, data reduction, and deduplication.
No sentiment score available
I want to see Pure Storage not only be for fast storage, but I want to see it be for the entire data center.
We've seen that when we create a POD in synchronous mode, it increases the latency.
We would like to see VNC integration or be able to use Pure Storage with VNC.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
Pure FlashArray X NVMe is highly scalable, offering easy expansion and reliable performance with some customization and cost limitations.
Sentiment score
7.3
IBM FlashSystem is highly scalable, supporting various storage options, and easily upgraded without hardware replacement, suitable for diverse enterprises.
No sentiment score available
We also have an X90R2 with two petabytes of NVMe in it which fits in about six rack units of space.
We are able to push the X70 way past our current needs from a throughput and IOPS perspective – without any degradation on latency.
We have also performed storage and controller upgrades live with zero downtime.
 

Setup Cost

Sentiment score
7.8
Enterprise buyers view Pure FlashArray X NVMe pricing as a mixed experience, balancing high costs with valuable long-term investment.
Sentiment score
5.5
IBM FlashSystem offers competitive pricing with various models and discounts, often seen as providing good overall value.
No sentiment score available
While the prices may be higher than those of other vendors, we see it as a market leader with benefits.
The support can be a bit pricey, but the solution is more cost-effective than anything else out there.
We pay approximately $50,000 USD per year in licensing fees.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.4
Pure FlashArray X NVMe is highly stable and reliable, with users experiencing minimal issues and rating it highly.
Sentiment score
7.6
IBM FlashSystem is highly praised for its stability, high performance, and minimal issues, especially the reliable 9000 series.
No sentiment score available
We have gone through multiple software upgrades, as well as completely non-disruptive hardware upgrades.
During the eight years, there have been no problems such as hardware failure or stopping.
There was one minor issue when the M70s were first released – but they have been 100% stable since.
 

Valuable Features

Sentiment score
8.1
Pure FlashArray X NVMe excels in performance, reliability, and scalability, offering advanced features for efficient storage and management.
Sentiment score
8.3
IBM FlashSystem is valued for its high performance, ease of use, flexibility, reliability, scalability, and powerful storage features.
No sentiment score available
Going from a legacy vendor to Pure Storage, we saw reductions in MRP reports previously running at six hours going to 30 minutes.
The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and performance.
The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use.
 

Categories and Ranking

Pure FlashArray X NVMe
Sponsored
Ranking in All-Flash Storage
16th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays (7th)
IBM FlashSystem
Ranking in All-Flash Storage
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
107
Ranking in other categories
NAS (4th), Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) (3rd)
NetApp ASA
Ranking in All-Flash Storage
25th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise SAN (6th), NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the All-Flash Storage category, the mindshare of Pure FlashArray X NVMe is 0.8%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM FlashSystem is 7.3%, up from 6.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp ASA is 1.8%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
All-Flash Storage
 

Featured Reviews

Paul Pearson - PeerSpot reviewer
Works well, is easy to implement, and has upgrade analysis capabilities
We love the product. Pure Storage works really well. The CAT tool and also the ability to upgrade the unit's place grades are great. It allows for in-place control or upgrades. It's a very simple implementation. They have a good tool to analyze upgrades. The stability is good. Technical support has been excellent.
Abdul-Salam - PeerSpot reviewer
An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression
Depending on your use case, I recommend looking at models that include compression and deduplication features to ensure the required level of UI performance. We dedicate the solution to one particular application so we do not face performance issues. An environment with a shared storage array across multiple applications or databases may need high performance storage, more memory, and powerful controllers. I rate the solution a seven out of ten.
reviewer2561733 - PeerSpot reviewer
A tried-and-true technology with good deduplication and support model
I would like to see more in terms of replication between storage classes. They provide different lines of storage. They have a lower class. They have a capacity class. They have their enterprise class. Currently, we have interoperability at the same plane with ONTAP, but we would like to see some more mix-and-match features. That would allow us to right-size our cost structure outside of the data center and maybe in places like a remote office or another colocation facility. Better interoperability between classes of storage or models of storage at NetApp would be beneficial to us because we can then continue to use NetApp across the board. We would also have some feature parity because we are bought into the ecosystem.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which All-Flash Storage solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
31%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Pure FlashArray X NVMe?
Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use.
What needs improvement with Pure FlashArray X NVMe?
After implementation, there are limitations, such as the number of paths, file systems, and replication options. It f...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp ASA?
It is pretty good. It is definitely cheaper than Dell EMC. It is cheaper than Pure. It is cheaper than VAST. It is de...
What needs improvement with NetApp ASA?
I would like to see more in terms of replication between storage classes. They provide different lines of storage. Th...
What is your primary use case for NetApp ASA?
We mostly use the solution for primary storage, and then we also have a secondary set that we are using for secondary...
 

Also Known As

Pure FlashArray//X NVMe, Pure FlashArray//X, FlashArray//X
IBM Storwize
No data available
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Fremont Bank, Judson ISD, The Nielsen Company
Celero, Friedhelm Loh Group, Clarks, Mingkang Natregro Health Food Group, Sofia, Etisalat Fights Fraud, UF Health Shands Hospital, Generali, Elecon Engineering Company Limited, Ventiv , Technology, CPFL Energia, Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd., SciQuest, Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated, Paddy Power, Kelsey-Seybold Clinic, Interconnect Services, Severstal IP-Only AB, PVU Group GmbH
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage. Updated: November 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.