No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Fujitsu Eternus DX Series vs NetApp E-Series comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Everpure FlashArray
Sponsored
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
231
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (3rd)
Fujitsu Eternus DX Series
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays (21st)
NetApp E-Series
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.0
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays (13th)
 

Featured Reviews

Sowjanya MV - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at Wipro Limited
Has improved performance for mission-critical workloads and enabled seamless non-disruptive upgrades
The availability is 99.99%, which is the main factor any customer would need because their data should be available whenever they want to access it. This is one main critical thing. It is very easy to upgrade since Pure Storage FlashArray handles it well. Everything is non-disruptive now; previously, there were forklift shifts, but now that is not the case. Pure Storage FlashArray says no to forklift upgrades. Usually hardware requires downtime, but Pure Storage FlashArray has improved their footprint so that they are not asking for downtime; everything is just a non-disruptive activity, which is why customers are more inclined towards Pure Storage FlashArray. Customers want more of the models in their environment due to the performance they are giving, and everything is in one Pure1 Array console where we can view all the models on one page or just an orchestration tool. You don't miss anything; you have replication, notifications about replication, and details about which host groups replication is happening in and if that replication is successful or failed. On a daily basis, our purpose is to create volumes for infrastructure; our daily activities include creating volumes and mapping them to the host, doing any migrations from a VM, clearing the data stores, and carving the volumes to those VMs. One key factor is the data compression with a ratio of 5:1, focusing on space efficiency, inline deduplication, and the compression Pure Storage FlashArray works on; that is a major factor we can suggest to any customer. Analytical capabilities are crucial. Daily, we check the throughput and consumption, and Pure Storage FlashArray provides predictions for one year regarding usage. This prediction helps plan updates well ahead. For support, we just raise a case, and they follow up and get it done. There is also AI readiness, but with the model R2, we don't have much of that AI readiness. For others, we do have AI readiness that predicts capacity based on daily or monthly trends, enabling us to analyze how much space we need or if we need to expand the disk shelf. From an operational point of view, a good feature is that if you accidentally delete a volume, it will be retained in the destroyed state for the next twenty-four hours, which is not the same with any other vendor. I have worked in this storage domain for the past fifteen years, and this option is remarkable, benefiting any L1 or L2 engineer. Additionally, from a compliance perspective, Pure Storage FlashArray has REST APIs enabled. I have not explored automation much, but from a security standpoint, it is strong with encryption data. If you want to automate, you can easily integrate with all clouds and explore Pure Cloud for scheduling workloads, including volume creation. Customers find benefit in Pure Storage FlashArray's single management pane of glass due to the dual controller and active-active setup. If one of the controllers goes down, all workloads automatically shift to the other controller, ensuring their data is safe and accessible at all times. This is a highlighted feature that any customer desires because their data should always be accessible. For SAN workloads, we use Pure Storage FlashArray because for SAN FC fiber channel, we don't use it; we use NetApp for NAS activities. We have clearly split this, so SAN is for mission-critical applications, while network-attached storage handles file systems. This architecture helps us maximize the benefit from Pure Storage FlashArray due to the significant workloads from this giant retail client. From a footprint and energy consumption perspective, you can see energy consumption from the Pure1 storage portal on a daily basis, and it is very compact. The three models we use consume only three units, which is quite low. From a footprint and data center perspective, it doesn't occupy much space. As everything moves to cloud, there are requirements to avoid excess spending on data centers, and Pure Storage FlashArray is efficient in energy consumption and is environmentally friendly.
Mir Gulzar Ahmed - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at Synergy Computers
Offer reliable storage and servers, and their libraries are also very reliable
The only weakness is that the internal cache is low, starting from 16 GB to 64 GB. Even the larger models only have 128 GB. In comparison, NetApp storage starts with 64 GB of cache or storage memory, and their enterprise models have 128 GB or more. Hitachi doesn't offer 16 GB of cache for storage, and their options start with higher amounts like 128 GB. So, if a customer needs more cache or storage memory, the Eternus DX series is not the right solution. However, if they need a cheaper storage solution with enterprise scalability and reliability, they should consider Fujitsu. There are no additional features needed, but the software products for Eternus DX can become very expensive when used in combination. For example, the software stack for replication DR from mirroring and remote data replication is costly. Even with the complete software suite, it remains cheaper than NetApp, but the prices for individual components like deduplication, local copy, and remote copy could be reduced. It's worth noting that deduplication in Fujitsu and Hitachi is not free of cost, unlike NetApp, where it is free of cost.
Mir Gulzar Ahmed - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at Synergy Computers
High-throughput storage has supported real-time video surveillance and long-term archiving needs
Regarding scalability, I think there is no problem. While there is always room for improvement in any product, to my knowledge, NetApp is a visionary company that enhances product features consistently. They actively respond to new requirements and technology changes requested by customers, improving scalability, management ease, features, and introducing progressive software releases, patches, and upgrades. Scalability does depend on model selection, with entry-level systems being cheaper but able to scale to a certain level, while greater scalability requires higher-end models. For example, NetApp E-Series includes the E600 and EF600 for enterprise-class storage. The FAS series includes models such as 1K, C190, C30, and C70, demonstrating how NetApp evolves based on customer demands and responds proactively to future requirements in storage technology. From my perspective, I believe any improvement could involve adding another model between the existing entry-level and high-end options in NetApp E-Series since there are presently only two models. This simplicity in offering may help customers, but an in-between model would provide options for those needing mid-range solutions, making NetApp competitive in that space. The FAS and AFF series certainly have more model options based on customer needs and costs, whereas NetApp E-Series needs to expand beyond two choices. Regarding error handling in NetApp E-Series, because it is a cost-effective but not an intelligent storage solution, the error handling is not sufficient. The system is reliable, but its management is basic as it runs on firmware. In contrast, the FAS series includes numerous tools and software for error handling, providing better troubleshooting support. Therefore, while NetApp E-Series offers reliability due to its cost-effectiveness, there is a trade-off in terms of error management capabilities.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The biggest lesson that I have learned from using Pure FlashArray is that it's user-friendly, easy to manage, and very flexible."
"The most valuable feature is how it simplifies the management of the SAN."
"It is an easy to use product for all of my team members."
"One of the lesser sung advantages was when we started running our interface engine on Pure Storage. The ability to process messages and pass them through in our organization skyrocketed purely because of a disk that I owned which we were getting out of Pure Storage."
"Running SAP on Pure Storage helps a lot without doing any further tuning to improve application performance. Our internal clients are happy."
"This solution has improved my organization because it has good performance."
"Technical support is very good."
"Data deduplication is one feature I found to be the most valuable in the tool...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Fujitsu offers a range of scalable products within the Eternus DX series, including all-flash, hybrid, and large-scale storage options."
"My customers are satisfied with the performance."
"If we select the best use case for NetApp E-Series based on its intended purpose, I would rate it a ten."
"Customers go for the E Series if they need backup storage because it is cheap."
"The overall experience has been positive."
"The product is easy to use."
"The Snapshot feature is actually widely used; it is a feature that only NetApp E-Series has and it is quite good."
 

Cons

"The scalability of the solution is extremely costly."
"The difference in pricing could become a problem for Pure because the commoditization of the solutions could lead to a different price being a problem."
"A year ago they promised that they would be able to read through the database encryption with more metric and they have not delivered on that patch, which is significant because it gives us back so much more storage room. We want to be able to read through the encryption."
"I would like to migrate to the cloud in the future and know how that would actually work with this product."
"In Pure Storage FlashArray, the area with room for improvement is local MFA login."
"I would like to see data tiering to AWS."
"The product should improve its response time. I have also encountered issues with its configuration."
"In some cases, we get into very in-depth conversations around the movement of specific data and, what's more, chunk sizes. The documentation lacked any description or information on that."
"The only weakness is that the internal cache is low."
"NetApp should add more production lines to the E series so we can make flexible solutions more easily."
"With NetApp E-Series, when we are running active-active NAS4, sometimes due to either an issue or a bug, we experience failures. At least twice yearly, we have seen this issue. When it occurs, we lose critical systems such as MQ."
"Regarding error handling in NetApp E-Series, because it is a cost-effective but not an intelligent storage solution, the error handling is not sufficient."
"The solution must provide more training courses."
"Getting through first level to second level takes two hours minimum."
"Though the performance is there, if NetApp wants to be competitive with the others, it must improve their business continuity."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Price per terabyte is substantially higher than their competition. We would like to see it drop."
"Pure Storage FlashArray is expensive."
"It's priced higher than the market."
"My organization has a yearly license, but I believe that Pure Storage FlashArray has capacity-based licenses as well. I'm definitely happy with the pricing."
"FlashArray is expensive, but the quality justifies the price."
"There is an annual or perpetual license required for this solution."
"We do not incur additional costs beyond the licensing fee."
"The price of Pure Storage FlashArray could always improve. They are still more expensive than some alternative offerings. Cost is always a concern and when there is a battle they tend to be more expensive."
"The DX series is a very cost-effective solution compared to any other storage system sold by any vendor. It starts at $16,000, and no one else can provide a storage system at that price."
"The price is reasonable for NetApp E-Series."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
9%
No data available
Comms Service Provider
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business71
Midsize Enterprise38
Large Enterprise159
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which should I choose: HPE 3PAR StoreServ or Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series?
Both are great platforms, but if you are considering all flash solutions, I would recommend you to consider Pure Stor...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashArray?
I find the pricing of Everpure FlashArray to be quite high compared to other storage solutions; however, the reliabil...
What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashArray?
I believe we have covered the most important features; the architecture of Pure Storage is essential, and features su...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with NetApp E-Series?
Regarding scalability, I think there is no problem. While there is always room for improvement in any product, to my ...
What is your primary use case for NetApp E-Series?
We sell NetApp E-Series as engineered machines like FlexPod, which is used where high throughput and native storage p...
What advice do you have for others considering NetApp E-Series?
I work with VMware products, including VMware server, ESXi, and my experience is on vCenter Server, ESXi, virtualizat...
 

Also Known As

Pure Storage FlashArray
No data available
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Nutanix and others in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.