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

INFINIDAT InfiniBox vs Pure Storage FlashArray comparison

 

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:
 

Categories and Ranking

INFINIDAT InfiniBox
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise SAN (10th)
Pure Storage FlashArray
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
198
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Storage Solutions solutions, they serve different purposes. INFINIDAT InfiniBox is designed for Enterprise SAN and holds a mindshare of 1.1%, down 2.8% compared to last year.
Pure Storage FlashArray, on the other hand, focuses on All-Flash Storage, holds 6.3% mindshare, down 8.6% since last year.
Enterprise SAN
All-Flash Storage
 

Featured Reviews

GM
Good performance, suitable for big data, but the response time could be improved
The primary use case for this product is high-performance storage This product has good performance. It is similar to the Dell PowerMax and Pure Storage FlashArray. The InfiniBox has three active controllers. The response time for read requests can be improved. It is not as good as the solution…
Nabeel Sayegh - PeerSpot reviewer
Supercharges enterprise storage by way of highly optimized hardware, comprehensive data management and a feature rich interface.
During their early years, I was a member of Pure's Customer Advisory Board. In addition, when we first adopted Pure, they did not have replication GA yet. We got into their beta testing program and help them work out certain issues with that technology. One weakness I can say the array has, still to this day, is limited control on scheduling snapshots. Depending on the type of replication schedule you are building, you may or may not have control on specifying the start time of a given replication schedule. This is not a very big problem in the grand scheme of things, but something nonetheless that has bothered me about the scheduler in general. Another area for improvement would be automatic host alias creation. Other platforms such as EMC Unity/PowerStore will automatically detect the host name, create a alias for it and associate the logged in HBA's to it. Pure does not do this for you and as a result, requires manual configuration. This can be very time consuming especially when you are deploying a large number of new servers.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This product has good performance."
"Mostly, their support is also great at reacting to issues but moreover, proactive to prevent issues."
"Their technical support is excellent. It's the best out of any of the vendors we work with."
"Pure Storage FlashArray is simple and easy to use. It offers protection when removing devices. It has the ability to undo deletes."
"The initial setup was very straightforward and very quick. It was up and running in our data center within 24 hours of receiving it."
"Having fast storage allows actual servers to perform in high capacity so we don't have slowdowns on our applications."
"Its array houses our entire production environment."
"NVMe data storage platform that's easy to set up and easy to use. It's stable, with a lower response time, and quick technical support."
"Pure Storage FlashArray's overall speed is its most valuable feature."
"The connections are a lot faster than what we had in the past. One InfiniBand does what we did on all of our Fibre Channels."
 

Cons

"InfiniBox, right now, offers only asynchronous replication between two storages."
"The response time for read requests can be improved."
"Beyond a certain amount of petabytes, you have to have a separate system. Basically, it's not infinitely scalable."
"Having something native in the Pure Storage ecosystem would make it integrated and in one single company, and we wouldn't have to work with multiple organizations."
"Once, before Pure went public, we were a member of their customer advisory board and beta tested replication. One requested enhancement yet to manifest is the scheduling of snapshot replications."
"In some cases, we get into very in-depth conversations around movement of specific data and, what's more, chunk sizes. The documentation lacked any description or information on that."
"There are scenarios with very specific functionality around VMware integration particularly to do with the way we'd like to manage LUNs in VMware. The tools are pretty good but there's room for improvement there."
"I would like to get a weekly report of how our storage has been used, and if there is any storage sitting there not being used."
"I would love to see a true one click upgrade solution. Right now, you have to click and schedule an appointment with Pure Storage to be able to upgrade. I would love for it to automatically download, install, and fall-over every controller as it updates."
"This product has only two active controllers, whereas other solutions can have more. This is something that needs to improve."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The license covers any feature and also, the future features are already included. It is as easy as a 1, 2 and 3."
"The best features come included without any additional cost."
"We purchased a license to use this solution and we pay for the storage ourselves."
"When you are paying more than you were paying for the storage space, you'd like the cost to be less. If they could get into the spinning disk kind of cost, that would be it."
"The price is reasonable."
"Price is about the only thing that's wrong with it. A little bit better pricing would be great."
"It is a cheaper solution."
"It could always be lower, but it's okay."
"Pure Storage has not helped us to reduce our licensing costs."
"I would prefer that they lower their pricing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise SAN solutions are best for your needs.
842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
42%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Educational Organization
34%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Which should I choose: HPE 3PAR StoreServ or Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series?
Both are great platforms, but if you are considering all flash solutions, I would recommend you to consider Pure Storage. It may be more expensive, but it should pay for itself for its functionalit...
What do you like most about Pure Storage FlashArray?
We consume less physical storage because of the solution’s deduplication and compression.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashArray?
The cost of Pure Storage is subjective and determined by your environment. Pure Storage tends to be more expensive than NetApp, but it is cheaper than EMC. Performance varies with data workload, ma...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TriCore Solutions
Nielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, Cisco, Hewlett Packard Enterprise and others in Enterprise SAN. Updated: February 2025.
842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.