We performed a comparison between HPE EVA and IBM FlashSystem based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."There have been no fail-stop failures for the last five years."
"HPE has reliable support for HDD replacement."
"The solution's most valuable feature is storage provisioning, which allows me to easily provision the disk space on the servers."
"It is very stable."
"The speed, performance, and stability are the best features of IBM FlashSystem."
"IBM FlashSystem is a stable solution."
"The performance is very good and we use this product to enhance our core system."
"We are a 100% satisfied with the stability of the solution."
"The most valuable features are deduplication and compression."
"The performance of IBM FlashSystem is very good. The new technology and high throughput have given us more confidence in the solution. The management of the system has improved and we can control the monitoring system alerts and multiple FlashSystems with the Enterprise Cloud Edition, which is free. The migration of recently stored data to a new flash is much easier. You can move your data because you can utilize it externally."
"It is simple to make an update."
"The installation is nice and easy."
"I faced some issues during the disk replacement process in HPE EVA."
"Performance could probably be improve with faster controllers, but it is already an old device. We do have performance problems now, but it is a rather old device, so we have what we have."
"Product support is restricted to IBM only. It must be decentralized to IBM partners as well."
"The Data Reduction Pools (DRP) support could be better."
"The solution is not easy to use and could improve."
"The solution has a low number of NVME host attachments at 16 per IO group over the fiber channel."
"The GUI for monitoring performance metrics could provide better visibility. For example, it doesn't let me segregate the IOPS per volume."
"IBM could do more marketing and improve brand awareness. I had never heard of this product until a colleague told me about it. FlashSystem could add a few features, but it would probably increase the price. For example, Pure Storage offers instant snapshotting and partitioning. That would be nice to have, but I think the cost would go up."
"Customization features must be improved."
"The price is very costly."
HPE EVA is ranked 8th in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 4 reviews while IBM FlashSystem is ranked 2nd in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 106 reviews. HPE EVA is rated 8.6, while IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of HPE EVA writes "Has the ability to automatically deal with faulty disks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". HPE EVA is most compared with HPE 3PAR StoreServ and HPE StorageWorks MSA, whereas IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, Dell Unity XT and NetApp AFF. See our HPE EVA vs. IBM FlashSystem report.
See our list of best Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) vendors.
We monitor all Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) 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.
