We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem and NetApp NVMe AFF A800 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two All-Flash Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The high availability of the product is the most valuable feature."
"Overall stability is very good. It is a very stable solution."
"It has benefited my organization because it has reduced time to insights."
"The most valuable features of Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its superior performance compared to other flash tiers, as well as its ease of use, with an intuitive user interface that is simple to deploy and use."
"One of the best features is the support, which is excellent."
"The solution is very straightforward to set up."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use."
"FlashArray has some fresh efficiency features. I've never seen a storage solution with a compression rating this high before. It's at least 4-to-1 on Oracle databases. It's the best flash storage for Oracle."
"IBM FlashSystem is a powerful effective storage solution. Additionally, it is user-friendly, anyone can use it."
"Flash disk with Easy Tier option"
"The feature I find most valuable, is the deduplication, because the nature of the data that we are using in our current environment, has a lot of replicated data."
"At the FlashSystem level, customers are especially fond of multi-tier and distributed rate systems, particularly the dynamic rate six arrays."
"High availability and enhanced security; Proven dependability; Data compression with hardware acceleration; Advanced copy services features are all in this product."
"The technical support for this solution is good. They used to help us when the motherboard of Power Systems broke. Their response times are really fast."
"Stability-wise, this solution is fine."
"This solution is really user friendly. It also offers good performance and is highly reliable."
"You can easily scale up, and scale-out."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a product that is fast and provides a fast I/O."
"During the use cases of the solution, its reliability and suitability are the best."
"Low latency is the most valuable feature."
"The storage features are valuable."
"The most valuable features are stability and performance."
"NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is easier to use than some other solutions and the UI is very good to use for day-to-day activities. Overall, the solution has good technology."
"The product can be scaled vertically as well as horizontally."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing of the product."
"It is on the expensive side."
"We have run into a couple of instances recently where we are running out of space. So we have had to buy some more packs for it and they have deployed fine and it has increased smoothly."
"Every time I think of something that needs to improve, they're one step ahead, which I love. The only area I wish to see improve, I believe is coming, is in the FlashBlade product. Blade implementation fell short on a few of the services."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"The software layer has to improve."
"They could add more support for file storage and different types of storage."
"We would like to see more visibility into garbage collection and CPU performance in the GUI."
"The deduplication and compression ratio is not very good. It's not reaching a very high ratio."
"It has room for improvement in the area of stability."
"The design is a little old-fashioned and could be updated. The rack is very primitive and designed in an older style."
"The solution is not easy to implement. It takes a lot of time to study the product and it's a little complicated in general."
"The ease of installation should be improved. We had issues with the configuration model."
"The pricing needs to be more competitive."
"The solution should improve its pricing and the mechanism in the reduction pool."
"The storage capacity of this solution could be improved."
"Sometimes, it takes a while to get somebody competent on the other end of the line. They do have engineers in multiple time zones around the world. However, their level-one support is not always the best."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"The initial setup should be easier, and more like a plug-and-play approach."
"The product’s UI could be better."
"Stability is an area with a certain shortcoming where the solution needs to improve"
"The initial setup is complex."
"Increasing the RAM, and including physical cords would be beneficial."
"The product's performance has some shortcomings, making it an area that could be a little better."
IBM FlashSystem is ranked 6th in All-Flash Storage with 106 reviews while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is ranked 16th in All-Flash Storage with 10 reviews. IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2, while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp NVMe AFF A800 writes "Very easy to manage, highly stable and offers robustness of the CLI, API, and GUI ". IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, Dell Unity XT and NetApp AFF, whereas NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Huawei OceanStor Dorado, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, NetApp ASA and HPE Primera. See our IBM FlashSystem vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 report.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash Storage 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.
