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

NetApp FAS Series vs Panasas ActiveStor comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 7, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

NetApp FAS Series
Ranking in NAS
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
104
Ranking in other categories
Deduplication Software (5th), Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) (1st)
Panasas ActiveStor
Ranking in NAS
16th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the NAS category, the mindshare of NetApp FAS Series is 16.2%, up from 15.1% 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

Paweł Jabłoński - PeerSpot reviewer
Used for VMs with replication a feature, but need upgraded SSDs
We use this solution. I configured and updated it. Of course, I was also a user of applications that store data on that storage. We already have an SSD solution. So, rather than planning to go with an SSD solution, we are focusing on expanding it. If a company wants to deploy something new, it should choose a product with SSD, and NVMe disks. Overall, I rate the solution a six out of ten.
MW
A stable solution with good performance and bandwidth
The tool's setup is not difficult. The deployment is completed within two to three days and we would require three engineers to handle the process. First, we need to install the software which can take around two to three hours. Next, comes the configuration and connection to the central network which is complex. It can take about eight to ten hours to complete.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This solution provides us with easy management and great vendor support."
"I like the unified management feature because sometimes you end up running a single protocol on the entire system."
"Snapshot, deduplication, and compression features are valuable."
"It's enabled us to allow admins across the IT organization to more easily manage their own subset of data within our organization."
"The most valuable feature for us is the combining of HA and SnapMirror."
"The replication feature is noteworthy because it's faster than most and it uses little bandwidth. Then there's the friendly interface that the equipment offers. With this interface, it is very easy to manage."
"​NAS stability"
"The SnapMirror is a good tool because, as long as you're going NetApp to NetApp, it's ultimately the fastest way to move data. We replicate everything to another site for disaster recovery."
"We've found the product to be quite flexible."
"I am impressed with the tool's performance and bandwidth."
 

Cons

"The solution’s pricing is expensive."
"Currently, the newest release is not HCI friendly."
"There is room for improvement in deployment and configuration processes."
"The solution's configuration is not flexible."
"Its licensing cost can be improved."
"The one aspect of the solution that's negative for us is also more unique to us due to the fact that we did a MetroCluster. The tiebreaker piece that does the monitoring of the two different locations, and determines if one is not talking to the network normally (or if it's truly down) is a little difficult. It feels like it was not designed from the beginning to fit well into the other pieces. It feels like it was thrown in at the last minute and it is not smooth."
"Cluster mode needs to be more ubiquitous."
"They should add new features to the product."
"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."
"The solution is quite expensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing cost is on yearly basis."
"Cost effective storage for all performance levels (including all-flash)."
"There are products available in market with comparatively lower costs."
"Most storage vendors also have software, or licensing bundles, which may offer the required licenses considerably cheaper, but do also maybe offer licenses, which are not needed."
"When we need to implement a less expensive solution we use Huawei. NetApp FAS Series is a little bit expensive compared to the average of the market."
"It is a one-time license charge for NetApp FAS Series to run and we pay annually for upgrades and support."
"it’s not an inexpensive solution and it may not be for the cost-sensitive customer."
"I don't recall the price, but in general, pricing can always be better."
"The solution's price is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NAS solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
62%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
4%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which SAN product would you choose: IBM FlashSystem (FS9500) vs PureFlash Array/X NVMe vs PureFlash Array/XL NVMe?
Have you considered a NetApp FAS Storage for your NAS needs? I am sure it fits very well.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp FAS Series?
Cost is a big factor in our decision-making process. When we're buying storage, the first thing we look at is how much we're paying per gigabyte. Cost has been the driving factor when choosing this...
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

No data available
ActiveStor
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Children's Hospital Central California, Plex Systems, PDF PNI Digital Media, Denver Broncos, PDF KSM Legal, Clayton Companies, Virginia Community College
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 NetApp FAS Series vs. Panasas ActiveStor and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.