NetApp's FAS series systems offers a storage array system for enterprises.
N/A
Pure Storage FlashArray
Score 9.7 out of 10
N/A
Pure Storage in Mountain View, California offers all-flash array data storage promising affordability, high availability, and consistent performance.
N/A
Pricing
NetApp FAS Storage Arrays
Pure Storage FlashArray
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
NetApp FAS Storage Arrays
Pure Storage FlashArray
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
NetApp FAS Storage Arrays
Pure Storage FlashArray
Considered Both Products
NetApp FAS Storage Arrays
Verified User
Engineer
Chose NetApp FAS Storage Arrays
We selected NetApp back in 2011 before looking at Pure. I took a look at Pure several years ago just to compare. They *do* appear impressive and I might seriously consider them if we were deciding today. However, NetApp just seemed to have a much more mature product than Pure …
We had chosen NetApp FAS series because of its high performance, deduplication, manageability, and backup features. Although I have been able to use these NetApp FAS series features, the implementation of them has not worked as well as with other storage providers. There was …
Like most other unified solutions, NetApp excels in one particular area, unstructured data. Whilst it can, and does support the presentation of block-based volumes, I do not view it as a strong suit for NetApp. When comparing to other products, the two Unified products that I …
NetApp is best as a Windows file server virtual machines alternative and is perfect as a native CIFS server. We backup with NMDP protocol. Pure Storage is the winner for virtual machine storage with its incredible performance.
NetApp has a lot of issues. Its software is clunky and complicated. It wastes much capacity in the storage operating system. It doesn't do deduplication and compression that well and takes a CPU hit when it does. And all-flash storage was never really an option. At just about …
Pure Storage stands head and shoulders above their competition. Not only is performance and usable capacity better and faster respectively, but the predictable support costs also make this a "no-brainer." Having used other storage arrays, from setup to support, Pure is by far …
Verified User
Team Lead
Chose Pure Storage FlashArray
When updating the software with NetApp it is a pain staking process since you have several components to update (Controllers, Hard Drives, RLM, Shelves, etc.). During the upgrades you also have to bring your CPU and disk utilization down to 50% before you can perform the …
Although more expensive, the FlashArray's performance, dedupe, simplicity of configuration, and support all blow the other arrays out of the water. I have had nothing but pleasant experiences with the techs at Pure Storage, and they've been plenty helpful and supportive (both …
At first, they most of our selection criteria but were missing some key components. We could use them for specialized deployments but not shared systems. They worked with us and added the components we required and we now are moving all storage needs to Pure Storage systems. …
We considered Nutanix HyperConverged systems, EMC XtremIO, NetApp SolidFire; evaluated HP Nimble All Flash & Hybrid, NetApp AFF series and VMware vSAN. The former 3 were ruled out for being too expensive and in some cases offering too little for too much money. The later did …
FlashArray just works. They set it up with us and it works. The interface is simple. Things are easy to do. We use it as a backend for VMware and sometimes as a backend for Linux-HA-based NFS/SMB serving. It's just there and easy. IBM's V7000 was cool but required …
We used to have Violin which definitely is very fast, but it is just not very pleasant to use. The performance was a little better with Violin, but the support and features didn't stack up. We also use Netapp FAS for file shares and non-critical workloads, here Netapp has more …
Nimble, NetApp and VSAN are all products that were evaluated and with which we had previous experience.
Nimble and NetApp at the time were both promoting hybrid systems rather than all flash. In both cases, we favoured all flash since it had become affordable and is much more …
Dell and Netapp require constant touching and management in our experience. The Flash Array is the opposite of that. The monitoring that PureOne provides for free is also awesome and costs money from other competitors. The other vendors really didn't have a great answer to the …
None of the arrays that we had in production could touch what Pure is capable of doing. I evaluated the EMC and NetApp AFA offerings at the same time I did the Pure POC. There was no comparison. That is why we now have 20 Pure arrays.
We have twice the deduplication on our Pure Flash as we do our Tegile. Even the flash on the Tegile can get to 5 or 6 ms, while the Pure rarely gets close to 1 ms and never crosses it. Our Tegile has both flash shelves and hybrid, so that is impacting the latency as the hybrid …
Chief Information, Facility, Purchasing and Services Manager - Roma Metropolitane S.r.l.
Chose Pure Storage FlashArray
We have used NetApp for SAN and NAS, the experience is very different for the learning curve, NetApp is much more complicated, the integration with other software like backup and replication is simple, you don't need an orchestrator like DFM.
EMC needs a trained engineer to manage it. NetApp was our first HA storage device. It lacked performance. Pure Storage FA is our first all flash storage. No more worries about performance, and hassle-free management.