IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe Reviews

There are many advantages that we have with IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe against, for example, IBM full flash systems and other NetApp solutions that are noteworthy.

The way IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe enhances high-speed data transactions is about the responsiveness. When we reduce the latency, it creates a significant improvement. It is not only the media itself, but also the protocol and the communication. Before we used the SCSI protocol, which is from the eighties, but we switched to NVMe, which is Non-Volatile Memory Express protocol. This protocol goes from front end to back end, so we are coming to the full flash solutions and combining them with the protocol communication NVMe to enhance a lot. So it comes down from truly synchronous to micro-synchronous application level.

IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe supports mission vertical applications in two ways, as I explained. The first one is about the many architectures; it is to push the two ways that centralized it is a solution. We have many users and centralized databases, so for that, we have many requests and need to have both bandwidth and responses in very low latency. Before we struggled with bandwidth and even for latency, so we decreased that with the full flash solution, decreasing the latency while also enhancing bandwidth. Scalability of the solution is very important, so we can fit exactly the needs of today's application workload while enhancing the scaling of the number of controllers behind it.

The impact of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe protocol on data center performance varies by industry. For the financial sector, there is the end of the business day where we need to collect data and process it every day, quarter, and year. The time taken to batch the data directly depends on the data storage and data collection. By minimizing the window for this batch process, we increase resiliency and security for tomorrow's business. The same applies to telco businesses; for example, with billing for a million subscribers, if we process invoices, there was a delay of three days with mechanical disks, which means significant impact. This ability to reduce batching times translates to better return on investment, despite potentially higher acquisition costs.

I have found many features of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe valuable. First, it matters whether you are technical or not. For the technical part, there are many features. The first is about the hardware connection between the controller and the enclosures. Before, it was five, three, twelve gigabytes, five seconds, but now we reach up to one hundred gigabytes IP. We can have the bandwidth between the controller and the enclosures, and speaking of data density, we can talk about around core data centers, so we can put more data with less hardware. With the increased sizing of disks, we reach up to sixty-four terabytes in one disk, and we can fit up to thirty-six disks inside the same enclosures, resulting in up to two terabytes effective capacity. This reduces the footprint and optimizes data center operations. Additionally, we can handle this kind of scaling with the same unified storage systems. It is also important to note that we are not only considering block connections but also hybrid connections. The feature allows for file sharing, and this capability is valuable for the full flash solution as we have a unified system for mass data and enterprise block storage.

In terms of improvement regarding IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe, I can compare with other competitors, especially regarding solution architecture. Data resiliency can be a concern because IBM can reach up to only four controllers, while others like Dell EMC can support up to eight controllers with better resiliency without service staff. Additionally, the SBC one benchmark is a storage performance console that stresses different storage solutions like Dell EMC and NetApp. It generates metrics of IOPS and latency, showing that the competition can have two million IOPS, significantly outperforming IBM's capabilities. As for the capability of scaling, we can see the limitations in reaching such high-performance levels.

I have been working with this solution for almost four years now.

IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is a stable solution. I have not heard any bad feedback or negative use cases about it.

The scalability of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe depends on the configuration. We can start with two controllers and scale up to four, but to go beyond that, we need another IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe, much like the competitors.

My impression of IBM's tech support is good; it is reliable and efficient.

The setup of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is straightforward.

The deployment takes about half a day, and the setup is done. If the configuration is pre-saved, we can even script the configuration, push it to the storage, and within half a day all setup, including zoning and mapping, is completed.

When discussing cost-saving outcomes from deploying IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe, you must consider the impact of delays in invoicing. For telco sectors, such delays can negatively affect revenue; thus, once we optimize the transition from old to new storage, the efficiency gains will make the cost of acquisition seem negligible when viewed against improved invoicing speed.

The licensing cost for IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe can be seen as a bit expensive compared to competitors. You can either opt for a basic package and selectively add features or take a bundle with all licenses included, which usually trends higher in cost than other providers.

The strength of IBM is particularly evident in the financial sector; it is not just about the storage but about IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe. When we bundle IBM PowerSystem with the full flash system, it positively impacts storage performance as it provides continuity and reliability, eliminating the need for multiple service providers for storage and servers. IBM Power Servers are very stable and suitable for financial services, as recommended by database editors and providers. The stability at the server level enables us to enhance storage performance significantly.

My recommendation for those wanting to start using IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is that if you are using older technology, such as mechanical disks, do not just focus on the total cost of acquisition. It is crucial to emphasize the return on investment to the decision-makers, as it plays an essential role in understanding long-term benefits.

Regarding the IOPS and latency of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe, I find that the current capability already exceeds the necessary requirements. Competitive systems might appear to offer more IOPS, but from the application perspective, the actual needs might not demand such high capabilities. Pricing per effective terabyte, especially after accounting for compression and deduplication, is also a critical metric when comparing against different vendors.

I would rate this product a seven out of ten.

We use IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe as a storage device in the IT industry.

The features I find most valuable include its use for storage and performance.

The solution's compression needs to be improved, as it's not the best. Furthermore, support from the partner could also be improved as it's been difficult to get answers and the support is not of high quality.

I have been using IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe for about four years.

We had a few stability issues, possibly due to the partner's incorrect setup.

I would rate the scalability a seven. Although there have been no challenges, the setup by the partner might not be optimal.

My experience with customer service, especially with the partner support, has not been good. The overall expectations were not met, making it difficult to get proper support.

Neutral

We did not evaluate any other solutions before working with IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe. Only IBM was considered.

The initial setup was easy and not a big issue. I'd rate it a seven out of ten.

The implementation was handled by a partner, and no specific challenges were mentioned, but some stability and functionality issues might be related to their setup.

The tool is expensive, though I do not know the specific licensing costs.

No other solutions were evaluated before working with IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe.

I advise others to thoroughly research and compare IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe with other vendors to ensure it is the best fit for their needs.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

It hosts mission-critical applications in core banking. It's known for its durability.

However, the data processing requirements depend on the application. 

The implementation depends on the specific application. In our case, we use it for core banking.  Moreover, it is a well-known product in the Middle East, particularly among the banks.

As an enterprise, we can depend on this product. It offers high-speed data processing and a high rate of operations. The FlashSystem 9100 delivers on both these aspects with its redundant CBUs and cache size within the two controllers being more than enough to improve our performance.

The storage serves the virtual environment. Most of our applications run in the virtual environment, and it serves nearly 30% of the bank's capacity.

I like the performance itself. It's the fastest storage we've seen so far.

Traditional storage systems primarily rely on tiering to improve speed and performance for archive functions. 

But for the entire bank, all the banking applications, or any organization requiring high-processing applications, we rely on the FlashSystem because of its speed.

It's a good system, but some vendors limit specific models from being upgraded to larger capacities. This forces us to migrate to a different model just for additional storage.

So there are limitations in scaling the capacity within the same model. Therefore, integration with third-party vendors' products could be better.

Another point is related to ransomware, which is a big issue. The storage system itself should have built-in capabilities for different ransomware attacks, not solely rely on backups as a last resort. But they shouldn't be the only line of defense.

Ideally, the storage system, for example, the one hosting the server, should have built-in security features to prevent ransomware attacks in the first place.

I have been using it for a year. 

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. It is a reliable product. 

This solution offers good scalability. 

We can expand the storage but it's limited on some models and nearly unlimited on others. It depends on the specific model, whether it's an entry-level, mid-range, or enterprise model.

One of the key factors when choosing the system was operational cost. Since NVMe technology requires enterprise-grade infrastructure, we opted for the IBM FlashSystem 9100. This was primarily due to its reputation as a robust enterprise storage solution from IBM, coupled with its specifications.

The initial setup was easy.

The vendor did the setup because it was at the enterprise level. 

FlashSystem's data reduction technology has positively impacted our storage cost efficiency. 

Firstly, data reduction depends on the compression technology offered. In FlashSystem, it's more durable because of the high speed of the drives. 

Additionally, the compression leverages the flash storage technology, allowing it to be done on each disk individually. This provides more processing, which is why it reflects itself as more cost-effective.

Compared to its competitors, IBM's offering is the most cost-effective.

However, in the context of the Egyptian financial market, where storage infrastructure is generally expensive, the FlashSystem 9100 series might still be expensive.

If I could rank different solutions, I would put IBM first, followed by EMC, and then Dell data storage.

IBM is a reliable product for me; it's the best in the market. In terms of technology, for example, we can compare the data reduction technology used in the 9100 storage, the secondary storage, the hardware specifications themselves, the Control Blade Engine (CBE) specs, the memory, the cache, the Effective Drive Technology (EDT), the drive capacities, the scalability of upgrading and adding more drives, adding more enclosures, or even having more controllers for additional computing power.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We use the product to block storage for services and databases.

IBM FlashSystem provides the same software on each box, including virtualized solutions. It helps us administer every box from one single source. It is a robust and good product.

There could be a possibility of not requiring to buy a new box while upgrading to a newer version. It is challenging due to a lack of performance from the CPUs.

We have been using IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe for seven or eight years.

The product is running well 24/7. There could be an outage only when the software is changed. I rate the stability a nine out of ten.

We have over 30,000 IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe users in our organization. It is scalable depending on the disk expansion units in a particular box. We have to buy a new box for scaling beyond a specific limit. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

They have changed the whole technical support system and improved a lot since a couple of years back.

Positive

We have used Dell EMC and Hitachi. We switched to IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe for better pricing, performance, and ease of use. They keep improving the product range as well.

The initial setup process is straightforward. They also provide a wizard for easy implementation. We need basic information, including IP addresses, usernames, and passwords.

The deployment time depends on the size of the system and disk space. The machine then takes a while to initialize the process based on the storage purchased. We have a small team of six engineers managing fifty of these boxes. If someone needs more knowledge about the system, they must read documentation or watch videos.

I rate the process an eight out of ten.

The product has an average cost. We have a global contract with IBM. It is not that expensive as it allows us to use any storage for virtualization. We can buy the licenses for up to five years. I rate the product a seven out of ten.

I recommend IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe to others and rate it a nine out of ten. The systems are good.

I'm depending on IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe for enterprise storage with a high rate of IOPS. We use it for hosting a banking application.

I have used IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe storage banking and it is currently hosting all of the bank's applications. I have not noticed any decrease in performance and it has been a great addition to our IT team in a demanding banking environment.

The most valuable features of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe are its steady performance and usefulness in high-traffic environments.

In the future, the limitation is upgrading the same storage by adding a shelf to the desk. There is a limitation in the backend connection between the storage and extended shelf.

There is a limitation in the backend connection of the storage or expansion that could improve.

I have been using IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe for approximately five years.

The solution is stability. It's a great solution and if it is maintained in time and updated with the latest server, it will remain a great solution.

If we add a shell, the scalability depends on a legacy protocol and not the IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe which is a setback.

At the previous bank, I worked at we had approximately 9,000 users. We are using the solution at its full capacity.

I rate the scalability of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe a seven out of ten.

The support is expert and responsive. They are excellent.

I have previously used NetApp and Dell storage.

This specific implementation included many tasks, such as updating the firmware, configuring settings, creating storage pools, and adding hosts. The average time for the initial setup, including the configuration and support, was approximately three to four hours.

I rate the initial setup of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe a ten out of ten for administrators.

I rate the initial setup of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe a five out of ten for the regular user.

For this solution, a certified licensed partner should do the implementation. If it's an enterprise solution, it should be handled by the vendor. If it's intermediate storage it can be handled by me or the third party licensed IBM.

The price of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is less than Dell. For upgrades, the Dell solutions are more expensive.

I rate the price of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe a seven out of ten.

I did not evaluate other solutions before using IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe. I have used Dell and IBM and depending on the market these two vendors are doing a lot of marketing here in Egypt. They have the biggest market share in Egypt.

It is important to do a thorough assessment of the sizing needs when considering the IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe, as it is a costly product. It is not easy to upgrade multiple times, so the administrator or company should carefully consider their needs before making a purchase.

I rate IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe a ten out of ten.

IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is used for storage.

The most valuable feature of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is the snapshot. We use it daily for all of the storage units.

The efficacy of the GUI in IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe could be enhanced, and it would be beneficial to include a feature that can prevent ransomware attacks.

In a future release, the solution should provide a feature for accidental protection.

I have been using IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe for approximately five years.

We had one failure in one of our ten drives.

I rate the stability of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe an eight out of ten.

We have approximately five hundred users and two administrators using the solution. 

The solution is scalable, we have many open slots for additional hardware.

The support from IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is not good. We had a failure in the system drives, it was a critical error and we did not have effective support. 

We used NetApps before IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe. The paid support from NetApps is a lot better than IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe.

The initial setup of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is not complex. The full deployment takes approximately three hours.

Compared to other solutions, the cost of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is reasonable, with a one-time payment of around $70,000. However, additional support is available for $25,000 for three years. The overall maintenance cost is steep.

Having a conversation about the actual cost of the solution over time is crucial because the initial price at purchase may not reflect the eventual cost. There is a possibility that the price could fluctuate.

We have evaluated many other storage solutions.

I would recommend that individuals interested in using IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe compare its performance and features with other solutions. Additionally, it is crucial to ensure that the chosen system has ransomware protection capabilities.

I rate IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe an eight out of ten.

IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is being used for connecting to operating systems.

I have experienced firsthand the benefits of this technology. In terms of storage efficiency, the lack of moving parts has greatly improved the functionality of the system, as well as reducing the need for repairs and servicing. Additionally, the battery system, which is integral to the IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe, has also played a significant role in improving the overall performance and productivity of the system.

There are many valuable features of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMele I have found to meet my needs. Specifically, the maintenance cycle is a standout feature of this solution. The main component of the IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is the maintenance of the batteries, which have a predetermined and reliable four-year life cycle. This is in stark contrast to other solutions that may use spinning disks, which can fail unexpectedly, causing unwanted downtime and maintenance. Having a predictable maintenance cycle is a significant advantage and has made this solution a preferred choice for me.

There is a tool provided by IBM for repairing batteries which can only be utilized by those who have an IBM technical advisor under service contract. However, for individuals who do not have such a contract, the tool can be difficult to use and requires a zip file copy. I believe that it would be greatly beneficial if the tool were made more user-friendly and accessible for all individuals who need to repair batteries.

I have been using IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe for approximately five years.

The solution is designed to have zero downtime. The solution has demonstrated remarkable stability. We have not encountered any stability or performance issues thus far. However, the only challenge we have faced is in the process of migrating data from one system to the next, which can be a bit difficult. Nevertheless, apart from this minor issue, everything has been running smoothly.

The scalability of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is impressive. The system can be scaled from a small two-unit system to a large multi-rack system that can accommodate up to eight units. The scalability of the solution is dependent on the size of the rack cage, making it possible to scale the system to meet the needs of different customers. Additionally, the system comes in different storage capacities, so it is possible to choose the right storage capacity based on your needs.

The IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is linked to one to multiple DR systems. We have a large system that is using the solution with the Z operating system which are larger system.

We've had technical support before and it's been straightforward. It's easy to access, easy to use, and easy to liaise with it. We use support for a variety of things and they are responsive.

I have used other data storage systems, such as IBM Storwize and IBM DS8000 series.

The configuration of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is complex, but it's quite straightforward to deploy. The documentations are very clear.

The deployment time depends on the requirement, but if you were looking for a  basic deployment, you can be up and running within an hour.

We do the deployments of the solution.

The price of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMele can be considered affordable when taking into account the operating system that is required for it to function properly. This operating system, which is licensed by IBM, may carry a higher cost, but it is worth the investment for larger corporate entities, such as insurance companies, Fortune Five companies, and banks, who make up a significant portion of their target market. The FlashSystems are designed for larger corporations and multinational enterprises, and may not be the most cost-effective solution for smaller businesses.

There are not any hidden costs. The pricing model is straightforward, you acquired the hardware, you get the software license that goes with it, and updates that go with it within that period. There is typically standard three-year support from IBM in the first three years.

In order to make a well-informed decision, it is important to consider the architecture and weigh the benefits of the IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMele against its cost. If quick recall of data is not a priority, then there may be alternative options to consider. However, at present, this solution offers remarkable performance, efficient mirroring, and replication services. It serves as a remarkable improvement compared to previous solutions in the market.

I rate IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe a nine out of ten. 

IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is easy to use and comes with good performance. 

The tool's architecture is complex. It also needs to add data utilization reports. 

I have been using the product for five to six years. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is scalable. I rate it an eight out of ten. 

I work with Dell and HPE. 

IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe's installation is easy and can be completed in one day. You need one to two resources to do it. 

The tool's pricing is competitive. 

IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is mostly for medium businesses. I rate it a nine out of ten. 

Our company uses the solution for ticket or license use cases and we have 500 users. 

The solution is more available for IOPS warehousing, resolving issues, and reporting than other products. This is the main reason to buy the solution. 

The support, porting, and pricing are all good. 

The IP server could be even more available. 

The ZIO interface could be improved. 

I have been using the solution for five years. 

The solution is stable so stability is rated a seven out of ten. 

The solution is scalable so scalability is rated a seven out of ten. 

We contact technical support for issues and they are very, very helpful and supportive. Technical support is rated an eight out of ten.

Positive

The setup is straightforward. 

We implemented the solution with assistance from our partner and it took two days.  

The solution is priced well so pricing is rated a six out of ten. 

I recommend the solution and rate it an eight out of ten. 

Our client is Jaguar Land Rover, and we use the solution's storage array to store data related to car manufacturing and design.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its upgrades, as we don't have to do much homework because of its different controllers.

IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is an expensive solution, and its pricing could be improved.

I have been using IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe since 2015.

IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is a very stable solution.

Around 700 to 800 users are using the solution in our organization.

IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is a scalable solution.

I rate the customer support an eight and a half out of ten.

Positive

The solution's initial setup was easy, and a vendor did all the configuration for us.

IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is a very stable product. You need to do some homework to see if it supports your application, and then you can go ahead with it.

Overall, I rate IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe ten out of ten.