IBM FlashSystem vs NetApp NVMe AFF A800 comparison

IBM and NetApp are both solutions in the All-Flash Storage category. IBM is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.6, while NetApp is ranked #19 with an average rating of 8.6. IBM holds a 7.6% mindshare in AFS, compared to NetApp’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 91% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of NetApp users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 18, 2024

IBM FlashSystem and NetApp NVMe AFF A800 are high-performance storage solutions. IBM FlashSystem is preferred for pricing and support, while NetApp NVMe AFF A800 has an edge in features despite higher costs.

Features: IBM FlashSystem offers efficient data reduction capabilities, high performance, and scalability. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 provides superior throughput, low latency, and comprehensive data management features.

Room for Improvement: IBM FlashSystem could improve its integration processes and analytics capabilities. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 users suggest enhancements in software updates and reducing complexity.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM FlashSystem is noted for its straightforward deployment process and responsive customer service. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 has mixed feedback on customer service with some indicating longer response times.

Pricing and ROI: IBM FlashSystem is viewed favorably for its better pricing and quicker ROI. NetApp NVMe AFF A800, despite higher costs, offers long-term value due to its extensive features.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM FlashSystem vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 Report (Updated: October 2024).

Buyer's Guide

IBM FlashSystem vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800

October 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 817,354 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Pure FlashArray X NVMe

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the All-Flash Storage category, the mindshare of Pure FlashArray X NVMe is 0.7%, down from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM FlashSystem is 7.6%, up from 7.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is 1.2%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

All-Flash Storage

Featured Reviews

Paul Pearson

Storage and Backup Architect at Concentrix

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.

Read full review

Abdul-Salam

Sr. Manager - System Analyst (Datacenter Infrastructure) at Sohar International

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.

Read full review

Tanveer Rahman

Chief Technical Office at Novotel Ltd.

A scalable solution that serves as a storage for the cloud services opted by organizations

My company uses NetApp NVMe AFF A800 as storage for our cloud The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a product that is fast and provides a fast I/O. The product's performance has some shortcomings, making it an area that could be a little better. I don't expect to see additional…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Offers excellent features like efficient data reduction, a reliable SafeMode, and a great support model for continuous assistance and updates."

"The Pure1 component is most valuable at this point in time when comparing it with EMC. Pure1 is where you can have your diagnostics in the cloud, so you can look at things from your mobile phone."

"The latency is good."

"It's incredibly easy to use and greatly simplified our ability to both deploy and manage our storage subsystems."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."

"The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes."

"I appreciate the performance."

"Pure FlashArray X NVMe has low latency and high Ops. It is an evergreen model."

More Pure FlashArray X NVMe pros

"The most valuable features are deduplication and compression."

"The compression and deduplication features are the most valuable."

"FlashSystem offers proven technology in a compact package."

"It is simple to make an update."

"The speed, performance, and stability are the best features of IBM FlashSystem."

"The most valuable features of IBM FlashSystem are performance and security."

"This solution is really user friendly. It also offers good performance and is highly reliable."

"The storage system is one of the best in the world."

More IBM FlashSystem pros

"The most valuable features are stability and performance."

"We find the product to be very flexible."

"During the use cases of the solution, its reliability and suitability are the best."

"The storage features are valuable."

"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."

"Low latency is the most valuable feature."

"The product can be scaled vertically as well as horizontally."

"Over the eight years, we've been using NetApp with ONTAP, we've never lost a bit of data, and we've only experienced a few minutes of downtime in that entire time."

More NetApp NVMe AFF A800 pros

Cons

"We would like to see VNC integration or be able to use Pure Storage with VNC."

"If the customer only needs 500 terabytes and doesn't care how much data they'll put in the server, IBM is cheaper than Pure."

"You cannot tag a LUN with a description, and that should be improved. What I like on the Unity side is that when I expand LUNs or do things, there is an information field on the LUN. This is the Information field that you can tag on your LUNs to let yourself know, "Hey, I've added this much space on this date". Pure lacks that ability. So, you don't have a mechanism that's friendly for tracking your data expansions on the LUN and for adding any additional information. That's a downside for me."

"I would like to see some AI features that would allow arrays to intelligently identify threats or unusual behavior in the data pattern and give an alert."

"We would like to see more visibility into garbage collection and CPU performance in the GUI."

"Our use cases require more multi-tenant capabilities and additional VLAN interfaces for separating different customers. We currently use it to provide storage, sometimes shared storage, to different customers, but it is less flexible in comparison to a dedicated solution."

"Right now, the box itself is just strictly working as a backend storage system. It would be fantastic if we could access it directly like a NAS device through network access or SIS drives. I think they have an interface, but I am not sure how good it is. If we could address a box directly on the network without having to go through a server, it would be great. The replication schemas could be improved. We are not using replication on the storage level right now. We use a different type of replication. If their replication would be as good as the one that we have, I would probably run the replication schema because it might be faster, but I don't know that for a fact. So, I cannot say that they have good replication. All I can say is that they need to inform us better."

"In the next release, I would like to see real-time analytics for further insight into consumption models."

More Pure FlashArray X NVMe cons

"Customization features must be improved."

"They don't offer subscription-based payments."

"This solution needs a management console where we are alerted to issues and can report them, or escalate them through email or another method."

"The technical support in my region is satisfactory but it could improve. Support is very important for customers and downtime is very critical for us. We would like onsite or complete technical support which can help us to minimize our downtime or if problems occur."

"I would like to have a larger disk. Right now, you can get 57 terabytes in a shelf. Once they get the larger disk and you get larger capacities, it'll be even better."

"The interface could improve in IBM FlashSystem."

"The Data Reduction Pools (DRP) support could be better."

"Events/log analysis tools."

More IBM FlashSystem cons

"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 product's performance has some shortcomings, making it an area that could be a little better."

"The initial setup should be easier, and more like a plug-and-play approach."

"Stability is an area with a certain shortcoming where the solution needs to improve"

"The cost of the solution is quite high. It would be ideal if they could adjust it so that it's a but less."

"The product’s UI could be better."

"The support can take a few days to have a response. However, the response that we do receive is very informative."

"The technical support has room for improvement."

More NetApp NVMe AFF A800 cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"With Pure Storage, we would like to continue seeing price reductions with flash storage. I don't think we're any different than anybody else when we continue to look to the industry for price reductions of both NVMe and traditional SSD storage. We would like to see these prices continue to decline and erode, even displacing large spinning disks."

"We pay approximately $50,000 USD per year in licensing fees."

"Our licensing fees are $500,000+ USD."

"With VMware, we pay $300,000 annually."

"The licensing is on a yearly basis."

"As far as the licensing costs, everything is included in the license."

"The tool is an investment that we've budgeted for. While the prices may be higher than those of other vendors, we see it as a market leader with benefits. We don't regret purchasing it."

"They can tout the functionality and cutting edge technology that they have, but that's where the price tag comes in. The cost is high, but I think as they grow their business and get more customers that it will probably go down a little bit."

More Pure FlashArray X NVMe pricing and cost advice

"The total storage capacity vs price is still quite high for the IBM Flash Array."

"You purchase it as a bundle and the price is comparable."

"Regarding licensing make sure you add at least three years software maintenance from IBM at the beginning, because you will not be able to download firmware updates or any fixes/patches without this."

"The tool is cost-efficient."

"The cost of the IBM FlashSystem is lower than the HPE solution."

"The pricing has been very competitive for the last few years. IBM got to the point where they changed the pricing model and we feel very comfortable with the pricing. It's very competitive. Over the last two years, IBM has been coming up with all kinds of interesting promos, especially for the SMB systems. That makes it very competitive price-wise and in terms of performance..."

"The solution requires a license and could be less expensive."

"Its price is very good."

More IBM FlashSystem pricing and cost advice

"There are licenses for the use of this solution, such as commercial licenses."

"Though NetApp NVMe AFF A800 may seem like a highly-priced product, it is not extremely expensive."

"The solution is expensive."

"I rate the product’s pricing a seven out of ten."

"Considering the requirements and the situation, I don't feel that this is an expensive product."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which All-Flash Storage solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

817,354 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Manufacturing Company

21%

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Educational Organization

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure FlashArray X NVMe?

I am an engineer and am not aware of the setup cost.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about IBM FlashSystem?

It is simple to make an update.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM FlashSystem?

The product is expensive. It costs around 150k for five years.

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM FlashSystem?

The product could be cheaper.

See all answers

What do you like most about NetApp NVMe AFF A800?

The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a product that is fast and provides a fast I/O.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp NVMe AFF A800?

Though NetApp NVMe AFF A800 may seem like a highly-priced product, it is not extremely expensive.

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetApp NVMe AFF A800?

The product's performance has some shortcomings, making it an area that could be a little better. I don't expect to s...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerStore vs Pure FlashArray X NVMe

Compared 37% of the time

Pure Storage FlashBlade vs Pure FlashArray X NVMe

Compared 14% of the time

TrueNAS R-Series vs Pure FlashArray X NVMe

Compared 12% of the time

Dell Unity XT vs Pure FlashArray X NVMe

Compared 12% of the time

Dell PowerMax NVMe vs Pure FlashArray X NVMe

Compared 10% of the time

More Pure FlashArray X NVMe Competitors

Dell PowerStore vs IBM FlashSystem

Compared 25% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs IBM FlashSystem

Compared 8% of the time

Huawei OceanStor Dorado vs IBM FlashSystem

Compared 7% of the time

Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform vs IBM FlashSystem

Compared 6% of the time

Dell PowerMax NVMe vs IBM FlashSystem

Compared 6% of the time

More IBM FlashSystem Competitors

NetApp ASA vs NetApp NVMe AFF A800

Compared 27% of the time

Huawei OceanStor Dorado vs NetApp NVMe AFF A800

Compared 21% of the time

Dell PowerStore vs NetApp NVMe AFF A800

Compared 16% of the time

Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series vs NetApp NVMe AFF A800

Compared 14% of the time

Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform vs NetApp NVMe AFF A800

Compared 5% of the time

More NetApp NVMe AFF A800 Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure FlashArray X NVMe

November 2024

Download Pure FlashArray X NVMe product report

Buyer's Guide

IBM FlashSystem

November 2024

Download IBM FlashSystem product report

Buyer's Guide

NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays

November 2024

Download NetApp NVMe AFF A800 product report

Also Known As

Pure FlashArray//X NVMe, Pure FlashArray//X, FlashArray//X

IBM Storwize

No data available

Learn More

Pure Storage

IBM

NetApp

Overview

Pure Storage FlashArray//X is the world’s first enterprise-class, all-NVMe flash storage array. It represents a new class of storage – shared accelerated storage, which is a term coined by Gartner – that delivers major breakthroughs in performance, simplicity, and consolidation.

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.

Your data is a gold mine. Get the most out of it - faster - with AFF A800. Designed for NVMe media, further accelerated with NVMe/FC connectivity to the host, AFF A800 all-flash systems deliver an incredible sub-200 microsecond latency. Providing more than 11.4M IOPS and 300GB/s throughput in a single cluster, AFF A800 redefines the limit of what’s possible with artificial intelligence and deep learning.

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

Buyer's Guide

IBM FlashSystem vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800

October 2024

Free Report: IBM FlashSystem vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM FlashSystem vs. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

817,354 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.