We performed a comparison between Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and NetApp FAS Series based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NAS solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward."
"It's incredibly easy to use and greatly simplified our ability to both deploy and manage our storage subsystems."
"The most valuable features of Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its superior performance compared to other flash tiers, as well as its ease of use, with an intuitive user interface that is simple to deploy and use."
"The standout features for us in Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its robust DDoS protection, seamless transparent failover, and failback capabilities ensuring high availability."
"The latency is good."
"It has benefited my organization because it has reduced time to insights."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"One of the best features is the support, which is excellent."
"The solution is very user-friendly in terms of maintenance and configuration. It's also possible to connect the solution to other storage management solutions."
"Overall, the solution is strong, easy and fast."
"This is a good product with high capabilities and high reliability."
"The performance was decent."
"The product offers high stability."
"Its resilience is the most valuable."
"In terms of performance and ability, the product can stand up against its competitors since the solution offers two controller systems to users."
"Storage is the most valuable feature."
"Most valuable features are its ease of use, robust Snapshot functionality, and that you can use it in two datacenters with SnapMirror-ing."
"Data consolidation and visualization."
"The support is very good."
"I like the unified management feature because sometimes you end up running a single protocol on the entire system."
"Ability to use mirroring and SnapVault have made backup no longer necessary."
"Using the built-in Snapshots and SnapMirror technology, we were able to have better working data protection locally and off-site."
"The solution is stable."
"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."
"Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe."
"Right now, the box itself is just strictly working as a backend storage system. It would be fantastic if we could access it directly like a NAS device through network access or SIS drives. I think they have an interface, but I am not sure how good it is. If we could address a box directly on the network without having to go through a server, it would be great. The replication schemas could be improved. We are not using replication on the storage level right now. We use a different type of replication. If their replication would be as good as the one that we have, I would probably run the replication schema because it might be faster, but I don't know that for a fact. So, I cannot say that they have good replication. All I can say is that they need to inform us better."
"The tool's pricing is higher than competitors."
"The UI for this solution needs to be improved."
"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."
"In the future, I would like to see integration with enterprise backup systems."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing of the product."
"We would like to see more visibility into garbage collection and CPU performance in the GUI."
"The pricing is high, but the product is good. Additional features like data duplication might make it even better."
"They should look at the cost because there are other vendors who offer the same cost with more features."
"One problem is that there are too many management tools for the F Series and for all the other Hitachi storage systems. There are four or five such solutions. Maybe these could be combined in the future."
"This product should be easier to install and set up."
"For the support windows to work, maybe they have to upgrade the firmware of the VSP. They changed the hardware or the disk. I don't know if it was the port blade they changed or a VM for a memory cache. Also, replacing the old target with the processor target would be fine. The old equipment is very easy to manage, and I don't have any bad commentary."
"Hitachi should offer a distinct overview of the various storage choices."
"The installation procedure it a bit difficult, because it is a high-end solution. With this type of product, the original company is interested in doing the setup for customers in the area, but because of sanctions we were not able to get support in our area. We faced many issued trying to learn to run this product."
"I would like to see an audit account set up such that the user can log in, see the configuration, and see the logs, but they cannot make any changes."
"If our customer needs a high-performance storage solution then we don't recommend this product."
"Technical support needs to be improved, as there are no longer partners in our country."
"NetApp needs to put its OS on a microchip rather than on disks."
"The solution can improve on the replication features."
"We no longer have OEM support in South Africa which is not helpful, it can be difficult. They should add an office back to the country because it was better."
"NetApp FAS Series could improve by being more secure."
"The adoption of flash by NetApp has also been lagging behind the trendsetters, like TMS, Nimble, and others."
"The high cost of the product is an area of concern, so from an improvement perspective, the tool needs to be made cheaper."
More Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is ranked 5th in NAS with 48 reviews while NetApp FAS Series is ranked 2nd in NAS with 98 reviews. Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is rated 8.4, while NetApp FAS Series is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform writes "Leverages a 3DC architecture with VSP for disaster recovery, offering a 100% data availability guarantee". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp FAS Series writes "Offers good performance and ". Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is most compared with IBM FlashSystem, Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, Dell Unity XT and HPE 3PAR StoreServ, whereas NetApp FAS Series is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), NetApp AFF, HPE StorageWorks MSA, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and Qumulo. See our Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform vs. NetApp FAS Series report.
See our list of best NAS vendors, best Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) vendors, and best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all NAS reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
