We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem and IBM XIV 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."The speed of the unit is its best feature. It performs very well."
"The most valuable features are deduplication and compression, which together, enable you to have more space."
"The performance monitoring feature is useful as it can report in 15 minute intervals by hour, day, week, month, or by a custom date range."
"The maintenance service and support from IBM is very good."
"IBM FlashSystem has been stable in our operations."
"The initial setup was really straightforward. It was not complex. Deployment took one month, due to the data migration duration."
"Ability to manage third-party arrays and virtualise them: One screen to control multiple arrays. Simplified administration."
"The speed and the ease of installation are the most valuable features."
"Very easy to produce reporting data (Snaps). Very easy and fast for provisioning devices and Remote mirroring."
"IBM XIV's most valuable features are NVME, especially when it comes to de-duplication, compression, and responsiveness."
"Hands down, this is the easiest storage platform on the market to manage."
"The performance and robustness of the systems are very good."
"Installation is amazingly easy."
"As it spreads, a chuck of 1MB across the board means using all available spindles on the backend."
"The solution has a low number of NVME host attachments at 16 per IO group over the fiber channel."
"The solution is not able to replicate data in one-to-many scenario."
"GUI interface should be enhanced more as there is some issues in copy services."
"The generic functionality of IBM FlashSystem, IBM always dismisses using file share or sharing protocols inside their storage hardware, and they only focus on the block-level storage."
"I would like to see an improvement in the handling of large amounts of rights."
"It has room for improvement in the area of stability."
"When you provision a datastore auto-format takes a long time"
"IBM FlashSystems is lagging in optimizing storage technologies."
"The change form synchronous mirroring to asynchronous (and vice versa) without reconfiguration from scratch would be helpful."
"I would rather have a web GUI served directly from the unit, and a CLI accessible directly through SSH."
"IBM XIV's scalability is adequate for our requirements, but because it's modular, you can't scale to larger requirements."
"Until the drive is replaced, the pool_resizing is locked."
"I encountered stability (performance) issues during enclosure or disk rebuild. Also some power supply issues due to malfunctions of circuits. Sometimes "internal" Snap sessions hang and consume pool capacity."
"This product was not a good fit for our organization as we have a ton of latency sensitive applications and XIV was not able to keep up with IO + latency demand."
IBM FlashSystem is ranked 2nd in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 106 reviews while IBM XIV is ranked 10th in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 6 reviews. IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2, while IBM XIV is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM XIV writes "Using it behind the SAN volume controller, latency is predictable and it is reliable". IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, Dell Unity XT and NetApp AFF, whereas IBM XIV is most compared with . See our IBM FlashSystem vs. IBM XIV 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.