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

IBM FlashSystem vs Panasas ActiveStor comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM FlashSystem
Ranking in NAS
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
107
Ranking in other categories
Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) (3rd), All-Flash Storage (6th)
Panasas ActiveStor
Ranking in NAS
16th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the NAS category, the mindshare of IBM FlashSystem is 7.3%, up from 7.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Panasas ActiveStor is 0.7%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
NAS
 

Featured Reviews

Abdul-Salam - PeerSpot reviewer
Feb 3, 2023
An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression
Our company uses the solution for robotic process automation, workflow automation, and document management.  The solution is used for certain front-end systems, so users are not aware of the how it operates on the backend. About 30 front-end users access each application across various bank…
MW
Jun 27, 2023
A stable solution with good performance and bandwidth
I am impressed with the tool's performance and bandwidth.  We have received complaints from customers that the tool is not easy to use. The tool's local technical service is slow. The solution is good for Linux customers and not for customers with other operating systems like Windows. The solution…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The FlashSystem 900 consistently delivers performance below 1ms for read/write. This performance is essential for an effective SVC stretch-cluster configuration across two datacenters, and presenting active-active storage to the customer."
"The speed of the unit is its best feature. It performs very well."
"The speed and the ease of installation are the most valuable features."
"The maintenance service and support from IBM is very good."
"The valuable features for us are the extra add-ons, such as the FIM provisioning, the compression, the disaster recovery capabilities, and the storage pooling functions."
"Stability-wise, this solution is fine."
"High availability and enhanced security; Proven dependability; Data compression with hardware acceleration; Advanced copy services features are all in this product."
"It is simple to make an update."
"I am impressed with the tool's performance and bandwidth."
"We've found the product to be quite flexible."
 

Cons

"Product support is restricted to IBM only. It must be decentralized to IBM partners as well."
"They can improve its initial configuration. The initial configuration is currently very difficult. There are multiple choices or alternative ways to configure based on the use case and what you are targeting out of the device, that is, more capacity or more performance. These multiple alternatives cause a lot of confusion. They should increase the processing part of the nodes. Currently, you can cluster up to eight nodes. From my experience and the workload that I am facing in my environment currently, I would like to see either a bigger or stronger node or a larger number of nodes that can be clustered together. We formally communicated to them that we need to see either this or that, and they are working on something."
"They can include Amazon file system S3 protocol in the upcoming releases. It is a cloud file system. IBM FlashSystem doesn't have this feature in the box for high-end or mid-range. We have got requests for this from customers because we need to use S3 for EDI application storage. At the beginning of every year, IBM releases firmware. When I find any bugs in the firmware during the year, I am unable to find any information from IBM regarding the bug. I need to open a ticket, and the IBM engineering team makes a patch only for me. This patch is not public. By creating a customized patch for a client, they don't really solve the issue for everyone. If multiple users have the same bug, IBM should upload the patch on the official website so that we can download it. IBM FlashSystem has a monitoring tool in the box, but it is not advanced. I need a more advanced tool for more advanced equations and monitoring. All top three storage vendors, that is, EMC, IBM, and Pure Storage, don't have a powerful monitoring tool. To monitor our box to show the statistics for I/Os and latency, I need to pay for extra software. The built-in monitoring storage is not mature enough to handle all requests and generate all reports that I need. They can include the functionality to stretch a cluster natively without using any additional boxes. In addition, there are some features that EMC has integrated with the box. These features are not available in IBM FlashSystem."
"IBM could do more marketing and improve brand awareness. I had never heard of this product until a colleague told me about it. FlashSystem could add a few features, but it would probably increase the price. For example, Pure Storage offers instant snapshotting and partitioning. That would be nice to have, but I think the cost would go up."
"They don't offer subscription-based payments."
"Enterprise data storage needs improvement. They should create a feature for data and file storage."
"Include an option to upload the support package to the IBM ECuRep when opening an IBM PMR."
"Events/log analysis tools."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"We have received complaints from customers that the tool is not easy to use. The tool's local technical service is slow. The solution is good for Linux customers and not for customers with other operating systems like Windows. The solution should provide storage without client software integration."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"My customers got the IBM FlashSystem bundle offer. It was a one-time purchase for three years of service. The price would depend on the storage size and could reach between $25,000 to $55,000."
"It pays to go back and get the best price you can from your supplier. The first offer is not always at the best discount."
"There are no licensing fees, it is a one-time purchase of the IBM FlashSystem."
"The price depends of the technology that our customers need. The price can come at a lower cost but this may increase as storage is added."
"Its price is very good."
"If five is a good price and one is a high price, I would rate the price a two or three out of five."
"This is an expensive product and if the price were reduced it would be better."
"The cost of the IBM FlashSystem is lower than the HPE solution."
"The solution's price is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NAS solutions are best for your needs.
814,763 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Panasas ActiveStor?
I am impressed with the tool's performance and bandwidth.
What needs improvement with Panasas ActiveStor?
We have received complaints from customers that the tool is not easy to use. The tool's local technical service is slow. The solution is good for Linux customers and not for customers with other op...
 

Also Known As

IBM Storwize
ActiveStor
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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
Advanced Mask Technology Center Airbus Argonne National Laboratory The University of Texas at Dallas School of Arts Technology and Emerging Communication Башнефть Boeing Bosch California Academy of Sciences Caltech Canon Case Western Reserve University Conoco Phillips Deluxe DirecTV Fairfield Technologies United States Federal Reserve Garvan Institute of Medical Research Goodyear Halliburton Harvard Medical School Honeywell In-Depth Geophysical Intel Kawasaki Lockheed Martin 3M Magseis Fairfield Mammal Studios The Man Group McLaren Mercedes-Benz MINES ParisTech NASA US Navy National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center NBCUniversal National Institutes of Health Nio National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Northrup Grumman Novartis Partners Healthcare Procter & Gamble PGS Pratt & Whitney Rutherford Appleton Lab Siemens Sim International Sinopec Solers Square Cnix TGS Toyota Motorsport GMBH Toppan Turner UMass Medical School United Technologies University of Georgia University of California Los Angeles University of Minnesota University of Notre Dame University of California San Diego Center for Microbiome Innovation Whiskytree
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM FlashSystem vs. Panasas ActiveStor and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
814,763 professionals have used our research since 2012.