We performed a comparison between HPE StoreOnce and HPE 3PAR StoreServ based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, HPE 3PAR StoreServ came out ahead of HPE StoreOnce. Even though both products have similar deployment difficulties, price range, and support quality, HPE StoreOnce has fewer valuable features than HPE 3PAR StoreServ.
"The standout features for us in Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its robust DDoS protection, seamless transparent failover, and failback capabilities ensuring high availability."
"Offers excellent features like efficient data reduction, a reliable SafeMode, and a great support model for continuous assistance and updates."
"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."
"The solution is scalable."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"What I really like about this program, is that it is easy to use and easy to configurate."
"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 features which are most valuable are the availability of the system and the management."
"The remote copy group failover is very useful and has helped us."
"The most valuable features are their tight integration with VMware, their multi-node architecture, and their copy services, such as Peer Persistence."
"This solution has given us improved application uptime and performance."
"Previously, we were using EVA from HPE. When we moved to 3PAR, we noticed a reduction in footprint, reduced by more than 30%. We use the Adaptive Optimization, giving us a reduction in cost and with better performance."
"We have additional space in the enclosures for additional disks, so we can scale up without any downtime."
"The InfoSight feature helps us with troubleshooting problems in our environment."
"The solution, stability, and the performance work well for us."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that the tool provides good value for somebody who needs an affordable and reliable storage solution."
"Technical support is quite good."
"The interface is very user-friendly."
"If you have a large enough storage capacity then you can take an ample amount of data."
"It is very easy to implement."
"The implementation is straightforward."
"The solution is stable."
"Deduplication and compression are in a good ratio. It supports the HPE Catalyst protocol, which is much faster than NFS and other protocols. We use CommVault and Veeam, and these two solutions support the Catalyst protocol very well and are integrated at high speed. It is faster than normal access."
"If the customer only needs 500 terabytes and doesn't care how much data they'll put in the server, IBM is cheaper than Pure."
"We would like to see more visibility into garbage collection and CPU performance in the GUI."
"I want to see Pure Storage not only be for fast storage, but I want to see it be for the entire data center."
"There is room for improvement in catering to midrange storage needs, especially for customers seeking Enterprise-class features."
"We have run into a couple of instances recently where we are running out of space. So we have had to buy some more packs for it and they have deployed fine and it has increased smoothly."
"Efficiency improvements would always be welcome, but I'm not sure if they could get more efficient."
"Our use cases require more multi-tenant capabilities and additional VLAN interfaces for separating different customers. We currently use it to provide storage, sometimes shared storage, to different customers, but it is less flexible in comparison to a dedicated solution."
"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."
"HPE has a product that I am very interested in, but it lacks of integration with 3PAR - HPE SimpliVity."
"I would like to see compatibility with NVMe."
"As a management tool, it would help us to have more customer reports."
"Needs more flexibility and expansion, and also relocation, a cloud solution."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ is at its end of life and they are forcing us to purchase new hardware. They will no longer support this solution. They should provide support for a longer time. For example, 10 years instead of five years."
"We did a firmware upgrade, and it brought the whole sandbox down. It was supposed to be done transparently, and that did not happen. It was not like we did it on our own; we had support set it up for us."
"The performance of the solution is not good anymore and the software is different from all the other types and is not compatible. There are more negative things at this moment than positive. This is why we are removing them all from our organization this year."
"The new feature sets, like deduplication and compression, are complex to work with. I hope when I view the roadmap that they will be less complex."
"The repository should have an extension to connect to the cloud and deposit the backups."
"HPE StoreOnce should come with a detailed installation guide."
"HPE StoreOnce needs to provide a SaaS solution by offering high-density disks."
"The latency is a bit high."
"The solution's technical support should be faster."
"The product could be improved with better support for data protection."
"The product's price could be better."
"HPE StoreOnce needs to be made cheaper than products from Dell and Veeam."
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 9th in All-Flash Storage with 299 reviews while HPE StoreOnce is ranked 2nd in Deduplication Software with 103 reviews. HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.6, while HPE StoreOnce is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of HPE 3PAR StoreServ writes "The product's technical support is outstanding as I can reach someone right away". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE StoreOnce writes "Helps to consolidate D2D backups and has a good deduplication ratio". HPE 3PAR StoreServ is most compared with HPE Primera, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, NetApp AFF and Pure Storage FlashArray, whereas HPE StoreOnce is most compared with Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), Dell PowerVault, ExaGrid EX Series, DD Boost and Veritas NetBackup. See our HPE 3PAR StoreServ vs. HPE StoreOnce report.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash Storage 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.
