The solution acts as a storage for mission-critical applications.
Sales Manager at Multicomputos PR
Helps to save money and resources with the data compression feature
Pros and Cons
- "The tool's valuable features are speed, security, data compression, and reliability. Its data compression feature is the best that we have ever seen. It helps us to save money and resources."
- "One point I'd like to improve is that the tool should start selling small boxes again. It discontinued some products and is focusing on bigger, more capable boxes, neglecting the SMB market. Even though it's not a big market, it shouldn't have removed them."
What is our primary use case?
What is most valuable?
The tool's valuable features are speed, security, data compression, and reliability. Its data compression feature is the best that we have ever seen. It helps us to save money and resources.
Regarding AI-driven initiatives, while we don't work directly with AI, I'm sure my customers are using it in their solutions. The tool's predictive analytics, which utilizes AI, work perfectly for service. Additionally, my customers run their AI solutions without any complaints so far.
What needs improvement?
One point I'd like to improve is that the tool should start selling small boxes again. It discontinued some products and is focusing on bigger, more capable boxes, neglecting the SMB market. Even though it's not a big market, it shouldn't have removed them.
One way to improve the product is to add an operational assistant that doesn't depend on VMware. It could also establish more alliances with other operational systems.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with the product for seven years.
Buyer's Guide
Pure FlashArray X NVMe
November 2024
Learn what your peers think about Pure FlashArray X NVMe. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2024.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Pure FlashArray X NVMe is the most stable storage solution that never breaks down.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
95 percent of our customers have upgraded their boxes, and it's very easy and fast to do so. It's always within budget, and most expand their storage capabilities. It's straightforward. One of the most important government facilities in my market operates on more than 400,000 customers. It hasn't broken down anytime in the last six to seven years, despite hurricanes, earthquakes, and power outages. More than 600,000 users depend on the product.
How are customer service and support?
The technical support is great; it's always on time. However, they changed how they sell support, which we're still used to. But in terms of actual technical support, it's a plus. The only downside is that they don't pick up spare parts promptly after a replacement. They usually take a lot of time to collect the parts. However, overall, customers always have their issues resolved promptly.
How was the initial setup?
I rate the tool's deployment ease a ten out of ten. We start with planning. We will have a plan once the customer gives us the purchase order. We discuss the methodology with the customer beforehand. Typically, the equipment ships within a month or even less. And when it comes to implementation, we usually take less than half a day to deploy the solution for a customer.
What was our ROI?
The tool is cost-effective. If it works and doesn't break, it's worth it. If you wait more than seven years to buy another one, you get a return on your investment.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The tool's pricing is cheap; I rate it a six to seven out of ten. Most of our sales are not subscription-based. We sell the hardware, and customers keep using it. They only renew the service part annually. The support can be a bit pricey, but the solution is more cost-effective than anything else out there.
What other advice do I have?
My company has both small and enterprise clients. I rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe a ten out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: reseller
Last updated: Jun 12, 2024
Flag as inappropriateSenior Systems Administrator at a consultancy with 5,001-10,000 employees
Enables us to consolidate as much of the physical hardware as possible within our data center
Pros and Cons
- "What I really like about this program, is that it is easy to use and easy to configurate."
- "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."
What is our primary use case?
We use this solution on private cloud for all our Oracle workloads and databases, and also for our enterprise virtualization infrastructure running BMR.
The main reason why we run our VMware on Pure was because it went hand in hand with the ease of use, configuration, compatibility, and the support. It was a recognized solution very early on and Pure Storage and VMware have a great partnership. It offers support for compatibility drivers and things like that.
We also use some of the integration tools from Pure Storage to help us manage some of the day-to-day tasks that we do with our storage and configuration and also to help keep things running optimally. One of the things we're using is the management pack from Pure Storage for vROps, so that we can continuously monitor the entire environment as well as our Pure Storage. With that we are more proactive about being able to make adjustments to meet the demands of our users. We use that to automate some of our storage augmentations when we need extra volume.
How has it helped my organization?
The moment we started using Pure FlashArray//X NVMe, we immediately saw a 30 to 40% improvement in performance. In addition to that, we saw a highly dense configuration where we were able to eliminate costly spindle-based storage and free up valuable real estate in our data center. That was immediately recognized.
VMware is really beneficial for our IT board. It benefits our IT organization by enabling us to consolidate as much of the physical hardware as possible within our data center. Essentially we can shrink the footprint to make more efficiency gains out of our existing data center.
What is most valuable?
What I really like about this program is that it is easy to use and easy to configure. I am also very happy with their support. It's the first storage company that we've actually engaged with and formed a partnership that does what they say they're going to do and they meet all of the requirements given.
What needs improvement?
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.
Pure is an innovator. They're a disruptor in the industry and I love that. That means that they're motivated and dedicated to being at the forefront of technology. So the only thing I can say is that I wish that Pure would keep up the good work and it looks like they are.
For how long have I used the solution?
We've been using the solution for four years now.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
We've been a customer for about four years and as far as the stability goes, we have not had any issues with the product. Again, it has met the described functions that we need. When our vendor told us what Pure Storage does, we weren't certain of that because many vendors make empty promises. But Pure Storage was the first company that delivered what they promised.
As far as stability goes, we have yet to have an outage. We have had failed components, but we've had top-notch support, and we've been able to resolve critical issues within hours. So if I had to rate the stability with Pure Storage products and our environment from one to 10, I'd give them a 9.7.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
For our environment, we have seen the ability to scale up and out very easily with the product. We have also performed storage and controller upgrades live with zero downtime. That is another key component of our requirements that were met. I have been involved with every upgrade and there have been no issues. Scalability for us has been great. It works well and it does what it's supposed to do, as advertised.
How are customer service and technical support?
What I like about Pure Storage technical support is that when you enter a request, you immediately get a response. Within less than 15 minutes you get a follow-up phone call, depending upon the severity of troubles you're encountering. That has been very good for us. And again, if I had to rate that on a scale of one to 10 I would say that's about a 9.5. That too is another thing in the industry that we haven't experienced before.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We were running on very old hardware that was all spindle-based sand solutions. Large-sized equipment with too much power consumption. We looked at other solutions like Kaminario, Nimble, Nimbus, 3PAR, and Tintri, but choosing Pure Storage was a no-brainer. We saw the solution, we were skeptical upfront, but when we did our research, it was very quickly recognized that Pure Storage was the right solution. We were able to save a ton of data center space with density ratios we've never seen before with hardware.
With Pure, we immediately saw value in the density ratios that we would be able to achieve. We saw value in the performance, in the scalability, and with the support. In the past, we've had trouble with support with all the other major vendors. So that was something that we took a risk on. Thankfully we did because it worked out.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup of any storage solution is complex. However, what Pure Storage has been able to do, is remove those complexities. When you receive the product, you will get detailed information on what to do. It really does eliminate the complexities. In other words, our experience has been very positive with the product out of the box. We did not need dedicated support engineers, we were able to figure these things out on our own, and we did it based on their documentation. If I had to rate that on a scale of one to 10 I would say that it's about a 9.5 as well.
What was our ROI?
One of the interesting things about ROI is that most companies assume ROI without quantifying it, which has one of the beauties of where I work, we were able to quantify an ROI. We looked at historical data from our previous spindle-based solutions and year after year we looked at those costs, the performance, everything down to the movement of water that it takes to cool this equipment. So with Pure Storage, we did a comparison in the same manner, and we saw a dramatic improvement in precious real estate space. If you had to put a dollar value on it, we'd saved a lot there. Don't expect ROI within the first year. Give it about two years and then you will start seeing a difference.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
As far as the licensing costs, everything is included in the license. That's something that our other competitors don't seem to do very well with as they usually have additional costs.
What other advice do I have?
On a scale of one to 10 Pure Storage has rightfully earned a 10 rating. We are very proud to be a customer and I hope the developers will continue to innovate and keep up the good work.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Buyer's Guide
Pure FlashArray X NVMe
November 2024
Learn what your peers think about Pure FlashArray X NVMe. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2024.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Manager, System Infrastructure & Security at Organik Kimya San. ve Tic. A.S.
An user-friendly product that is useful for virtualization environments
Pros and Cons
- "Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use."
- "The tool's pricing is higher than competitors."
What is our primary use case?
I use Pure FlashArray X NVMe for our virtualization environment.
What is most valuable?
Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use.
What needs improvement?
The tool's pricing is higher than competitors.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with the product for a year.
How are customer service and support?
I contacted the support team during the installation, and they were good.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We decided to move from NetApp to Pure FlashArray X NVMe because we've been with NetApp for 15 years, and sometimes it's necessary to change vendors. Additionally, NetApp didn't offer the expected discounts for this project, so we decided to switch vendors.
How was the initial setup?
The tool's overall deployment took two days to complete. It was easy.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
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.
What other advice do I have?
I rate the tool a nine out of ten.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Last updated: May 7, 2024
Flag as inappropriateIT System Specialist - Operations & Infrastructure at Daman
Reliable and feature-rich solution that meets our diverse storage needs effectively
Pros and Cons
- "The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes."
- "It is on the expensive side."
What is our primary use case?
I use the Pure FlashArray X NVMe solution to enhance our storage infrastructure.
What is most valuable?
We are incredibly satisfied with the product's performance and flexibility. The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes. The platform's robust features include excellent sustainability tracking, and a comprehensive dashboard offering insights into IOPS, bandwidth, performance, and virtual activities. This not only streamlines our operations but also provides a clear and detailed overview of our storage environment. Additionally, it has multiple controllers, letting us balance the load smoothly.
What needs improvement?
In terms of improvement, the dual-controller configuration is effective, but I'm eagerly anticipating the roadmap's promise of introducing multiple controllers, which could significantly boost scalability and resilience.
For how long have I used the solution?
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I would rate the stability of the solution as a ten out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We have approximately eight users of Pure FlashArray X NVMe at our company and we rely on it every day.
How are customer service and support?
I would rate the technical support as an eight out of ten.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We switched to Pure FlashArray X NVMe from Hitachi because it is easier to use, offers better visibility, and has automated reports. The user-friendly interface allows us to extend volumes in seconds, a huge improvement compared to our previous experience with Hitachi, which took five to ten minutes for the same task. The simplicity and efficiency of Pure FlashArray made it the better choice for us.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is relatively easy. Our deployment was quick, taking just one to two days. The first day was about setting up the hardware and basic configuration, while the second day focused on provisioning. The system's automation features, like running scripts to create volumes, made it a smooth process. Doing it in-house was straightforward, and the solution integrated seamlessly into our setup. It only takes one person to maintain the solution.
What was our ROI?
Pure FlashArray X NVMe has shown a solid return on investment, especially with the Evergreen feature. With this, you don't need to reinvest in the array every few years. Instead, by opting for the gold subscription every three years, you get a free upgrade to the latest controller release. It is a cost-effective way to stay up-to-date with the technology.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
It is on the expensive side. I would give it a nine out of ten in terms of costliness.
What other advice do I have?
Overall, I would rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe as a nine out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Head DBA and Technical Management at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
We're able to get higher-density workloads on the same infra, with a smaller footprint
Pros and Cons
- "We're able to get higher-density workloads on the same infrastructure, and we have a smaller physical footprint. The performance is excellent – during our test the bottlenecks are never on the X array, it just keeps picking up the pace to match what you need. The real-time visibility is a differentiator in my opinion."
- "We've seen that when we create a POD in synchronous mode, it increases the latency."
What is our primary use case?
We run all our Tier 1 and Tier 2 storage on it, our VMware infrastructure, all of that would be running on the //X70s. Our database workloads are on the new Xs.
How has it helped my organization?
The feedback I've had from the storage admins is that it's the simplicity. It's easier and quicker to allocate storage for us. We're able to get higher-density workloads on the same infrastructure, and we have a smaller physical footprint than we used to.
It helps simplify storage management a Database Admin perspective - there was a lot of thought that went into the size of the disks, how we allocate those, etc. Especially when doing maintenance or expanding disks. There was always performance issues when expanding disks on the old infrastructure arrays and allot of care had to be taken on offset sizes etc - Whereas now, we're finding that we can expand disks without having to remove and add disks again. That simplifies those admin tasks without any performance implications. From a Storage Admin side they love the ease of use and visibility the systems gives them.
What is most valuable?
- Simplicity
- Performance
- Visibility
Those are the three most valuable features that I've observed.
The visibility you have on what the frames are doing, even your phone is amazing, very detailed information about the environment in real-time.
What needs improvement?
One area that I haven't been sold on yet is the POD replication. We've seen that when we create a POD in synchronous mode, it increases the latency. We have another array that our latency isn’t affected by replication and when compared to the X array with a synchronous POD setup – it’s faster to respond to the system, but as soon as the POD mode is Async – the X is faster again. We not talking huge numbers – with the POD in synchronous mode with talking under 1ms for most IO operations.(Distance dependent to the other array) I do feel there is some gaps in my understanding of the POD setups in detail so perhaps its tuning gap.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The stability has been excellent, there was one minor issue when the M70s were first released – but they have been 100% stable since.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The only aspect that I can talk to is the benchmarking that I did from a Database perspective, as we purchased the X70 for our Database workloads. What we want to see is as we increase workload the latency should remain stable. We are able to push the X70 way past our current needs from a throughput and IOPS perspective – without any degradation on latency. As we ramped up more machines into the tests, the only limitations we ran into were switch ports and FCoE saturation – the X had headroom.
How are customer service and technical support?
The technical support is very good. The teams are awesome. The guys in South Africa, and they're very, very good.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
If you're looking at it from a database perspective, you obviously want to make sure that you can scale your workloads without a degradation in performance. What we've seen on the X’s, and the Pure’s in general, is that we can scale beyond what we need without any degradation in performance. The real-time monitoring I’ve seen via your phone is a differentiator alone – to get a heat map in the past was a big process and took place after the event.
In terms of the Predictive Performance Analytics, I haven't seen it myself. I know that the guys have just recently started looking at a lot of analytics.
Although I don't admin the solution, I would give it a ten out of ten - from the vendor technical expertise and helpfulness, it's simple, reliable, quick and predictable at the same time I’m expecting lower costs for us once we fully migrated.
How was the initial setup?
I didn't do the setup, but everything I heard was that it was straightforward.
What about the implementation team?
We used the main guys in South Africa, Data Sciences. They do everything, top to bottom if you want or with you teams. Our experience with them has been awesome.
What was our ROI?
I do know there has been a reduction in the total cost of ownership, although I can't say how much as we in a transition from our old arrays, but I do know the cost per gig is lower, the dedupe on the array helps drive this cost down – as well as the physical size is much smaller and uses less power.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
The vendors at the time would have been Dell EMC and Hitachi.
What other advice do I have?
It depends through which lens you're looking at it. If you're looking at it from a database perspective, you obviously want to make sure that you can scale your workloads without a degradation in performance, your latency times. What we've seen on the Xs, and the Pures in general, is that we can scale way beyond what we need to without any degradation in performance. We don't need to sacrifice any of the performance as we scale up or scale to the side. There aren't many vendors that we looked at that can scale to the size of the operations that we needed, from an I/O-testing perspective. In real, day-to-day, we don't run that hard. But if we need it, we can. It's there.
In terms of the Predictive Performance Analytics, I haven't seen it myself. I know that the guys have just recently started looking at a lot of analytics, but I haven't seen it myself.
Although I don't admin the solution, I would give it a ten out of ten. It's been awesome to work with. It's simple, it's very reliable, it's very quick. And we get excellent dedupe ratios on the machine without a sacrifice in performance.
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
System and Network administrator at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
A reliable product that provides high availability and excellent performance
Pros and Cons
- "The high availability of the product is the most valuable feature."
- "We need better data deduplication."
What is our primary use case?
We use the solution as storage for our vSphere environment.
What is most valuable?
The high availability of the product is the most valuable feature. We have two Pure Storages. They are in a high-available setup. If one fails, the other will take over. With all the virtual machines on the storage, we need a reliable solution. The product is reliable.
What needs improvement?
We are a little bit disappointed about the data deduplication feature. We were promised a deduplication rate of at least 2:1. At the moment, we get 1.8:1, which limits our expectations. We may run out of storage in the foreseeable future. We need better data deduplication.
I read that the vendor is working on a better deduplication algorithm. It will be useful for us if it works. We mostly rely on long-term releases. We don't need the most up-to-date features, but we need a reliable environment. It's important for us.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using the solution since June 2021.
How are customer service and support?
When we scheduled an update, the support technician called us and made the update remotely. We also had one outage where a controller of one of the products had failed and had to be replaced on-site. It took around 24 hours to replace the controller. The technician who came on-site did not have the controller with him. The technician waited one and a half hours until a taxi driver arrived with the controllers. It could have been coordinated better.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We used DataCore before. It was a Windows-based solution. We had to restart the servers every month because of Windows updates. Every month, we had to restart the servers manually. It was not very pleasant. Pure Storage is a Linux-based system, and there are not many security issues. We only have two updates about every six months. It is much more reliable.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was straightforward. The deployment took about three days. The first day, we just put it in our racks and put the network cables and fiber channel cables on it. On the second day, we made the initial setup with high availability and created the first volumes. We migrated the data from our current storage to Pure Storage on the third day.
What about the implementation team?
We deployed the solution with the help of certified partners. They were experienced professionals. They knew what they were doing.
What was our ROI?
Our performance has increased. We were using DataCore before. It wasn’t so performant. Pure Storage has flash drives. We have better IOPS.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The product is expensive. We bought it because we want to be able to use it for about ten years. The vendor offers maintenance contracts where we are guaranteed to be able to upgrade the system, change controllers, and do other things. We hope that in ten years, the solution will be worth the money.
What other advice do I have?
Overall, I rate the tool a nine out of ten.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
VAD PLSM Storage - Slovenia & Croatia at ASBIS
Extremely stable and offers various valuable features
Pros and Cons
- "Offers excellent features like efficient data reduction, a reliable SafeMode, and a great support model for continuous assistance and updates."
- "There is room for improvement in the pricing of the product."
What is our primary use case?
Our clients primarily use thePure FlashArray X NVMe for their primary storage needs.
What is most valuable?
Pure FlashArray X NVMe offers excellent features like efficient data reduction, a reliable SafeMode, and a great support model for continuous assistance and updates.
What needs improvement?
There is room for improvement in the pricing of the product.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with Pure FlashArray X NVMe for six months.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I would rate the stability as a ten out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I would rate the scalability as an eight out of ten. It is highly scalable, but there is room for slight improvement. It is suitable for both medium-sized and enterprise businesses.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is very simple. Installing it usually takes around one hour to get it up and running. The total time depends on what you are putting on it, like your specific data and applications.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I would rate the product as a seven out of ten in terms of costliness.
What other advice do I have?
Overall, I would rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe as a ten out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Reseller
Storage Engineer at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
We can monitor our storage from anywhere, and it is light in maintenance and very stable
Pros and Cons
- "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."
- "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."
What is our primary use case?
We use it for databases and VMs. We are using its most recent version.
How has it helped my organization?
Its speed is superior to our existing Unity x00 model. There are three different models of Unity. There is x00, which is the original model for Unity. There is x50, and now you have x80s. It has performed substantially better than our x00 model and a little bit better than our x50 model. I cannot rate it against the x80s on the Unity class, but from what we've got, it has beaten those two models performance-wise. This is bearing in mind that those x00 models were there before they had their own X-series with the NVMe flash.
What is most valuable?
The Pure1 App is most valuable at this point in time when comparing it with EMC. Pure1 is where you can see your diagnostics and cases in the cloud, so you can look at things from your mobile phone. EMC has not unified both diagnostics and cases into a single App that I am aware of at this time.
What needs improvement?
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.
Their technical support is excellent, but I can't get hold of engineers directly at Pure even when an engineer is assigned to me, which is a downside.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using this solution for two years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Its stability is excellent.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Its scalability is good. I wouldn't call it excellent because you're limited on capacity customization. You get that limitation with any array, but it seems there is a little bit more flexibility on the Unity side from a scale-out standpoint. Pure is not flexible on your datapak expansions. You're locked into a certain amount of storage. You can't customize your Pure flash storage to the degree that you can on the EMC Unity side.
Currently, its usage is pretty extensive. We're considering purchasing C-class arrays for our next use case, and we're about to use them more because of several factors. One of them has been that EMC is now starting to lose our organization's trust because of subpar support coming mostly out of India. The offshore talent in Asia or Australia is good, but the offshore talent in India is not good. Usually I know more than their L1/L2 support folks about their product.
How are customer service and support?
Their technical support is excellent, but I can't directly get hold of engineers at Pure directly. Their support system is such that even with an engineer assigned to me, I can't phone them directly even if an extension at an 800 number. I have to basically jump through a manager on duty, to try to get to the engineer, whereas with EMC, the engineer might not pick up the phone, but I've got extensions for whoever gets assigned to a case to leave a voicemail on top of an email. Pure wants to handle most of their support thru email exchange unless Zoom warranted. This is a downside that Pure has. If you get into an issue after you've got your initial engineer and you need to follow up, getting to them directly can take a little bit longer or more effort. While Pure has an "Escalation" button on their support portal they forget humans like to talk to humans directly when urgent. True you can email please call me.
How was the initial setup?
Its setup was more straightforward than EMC Unity's setup. It took about two hours.
It is not maintenance-heavy. Its maintenance appears less than an EMC Unity array. I handle the array, but in terms of maintenance, you can schedule the upgrades with Pure, like EMC. It is done all remotely by Pure's own people. That's one thing that is not good with EMC because you have to deal with their Indian offshore team for upgrades which is lacking many times.
Pure support is how EMC used to be. EMC used to be follow-the-sun, where you had support in Cork, Ireland, the US, and then Australia, but like a lot of our US companies, they have now offshored and it is reflected in worse support in several ways, one being communication barriers. Resolution times have been extended more than it should due to offshore support. I have had extended
turnaround times to get solutions because of their lack of talent. There
is a language issue, and their L1 support team is clearly not as good
as it should be.
What I do love about Pure is that it is lighter in maintenance.
What about the implementation team?
We used an integrator, and our experience with them was great.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Pretty much everything that you need is licensed when you buy the product. Licensing to me is different than the maintenance cost, but they can bleed into one another. We buy the product, and we expect three years of support bundled into what we negotiate on our storage arrays. I would start to see maintenance costs going into the fourth year, but we're not there yet.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate it a nine out of 10. It is hard for anyone to get a 10.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Pure FlashArray X NVMe Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Updated: November 2024
Popular Comparisons
Dell PowerStore
Pure Storage FlashArray
Dell Unity XT
IBM FlashSystem
HPE Nimble Storage
Pure Storage FlashBlade
Dell PowerMax NVMe
Huawei OceanStor Dorado
Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform
Dell XtremIO
NetApp NVMe AFF A800
Pavilion HyperParallel Flash Array
TrueNAS R-Series
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Pure FlashArray X NVMe Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions:
- Which SAN product would you choose: IBM FlashSystem (FS9500) vs PureFlash Array/X NVMe vs PureFlash Array/XL NVMe?
- What is the best solution for an enterprise-level storage environment?
- How would you recommend selecting a compute and storage solution based on the company size?
- Does NetApp offers Capacity NVMs All-Flash Storage Arrays?
- When evaluating NVMe, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
- Why is NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays important for companies?