Fungible Storage Cluster [EOL] vs NetApp NVMe AFF A800 comparison

Microsoft and NetApp are both solutions in the NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays category. Additionally, 100% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of NetApp users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 9, 2025

NetApp NVMe AFF A800 and Fungible Storage Cluster [EOL] compete in the high-performance storage market. NetApp NVMe AFF A800 has an edge in pricing and support, while Fungible Storage Cluster [EOL] is distinguished by its robust features.

Features: NetApp NVMe AFF A800 delivers exceptional performance with NVMe technology, fast data access, and improved efficiency. It also offers significant scalability and is known for its integration capabilities. Fungible Storage Cluster [EOL] is designed for AI and machine learning applications, providing composable infrastructure and data-centric features, along with superior computational storage capabilities.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is characterized by a straightforward deployment process, supported by comprehensive documentation and responsive customer service. Fungible Storage Cluster [EOL] offers a unique disaggregated storage model, potentially posing deployment complexities but includes dedicated support that is less traditional.

Pricing and ROI: NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is cost-effective with competitive pricing and favorable ROI, particularly for businesses focused on speed and reliability. Fungible Storage Cluster [EOL] has a higher initial cost but promises significant ROI in environments that benefit from high-performance data processing and computational capabilities, justifying its price for specific needs.

To learn more, read our detailed NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,757 peers since 2012

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

Pure FlashArray X NVMe

Featured Reviews

Jaehoon Oh

Chief Technology Officer at Lambda256

Supports efficient storage management through volume snapshots and offers reliable non-disruptive upgrades

I have no specific improvements to suggest for Pure FlashArray X NVMe at this time. The performance statistics could be enhanced. I can see the performance statistics in the Pure Storage console, but it does not show the performance by 4K byte unit. It displays IOPS and bandwidth, but IOPS is about real use, and I want to know how many IOPS are currently running in 4K byte units. I cannot see that IOPS because most storage systems report their performance by 4K byte unit. I want to see Pure Storage performance by 4K byte unit to compare with other storage or other internal NVMe SSD.

Read full review

reviewer1170159

Co-Founder and CTO at a consumer goods company with 201-500 employees

Easy to implement and configure but the security and reporting could be improved

We are using the Fungible Storage Cluster as our on-premises NAS. It is primarily used for file storage The most valuable features are that it is easy to implement and configure, easy to use, and really reliable. The security and reporting could be improved. We have been using the Fungible…

Read full review

Helder-Valente

IT Director at affidea

Has improved data efficiency and application performance while supporting encryption and fast access to imaging workloads

We use it quite extensively because with this we have more space and the information can be read without wasting time. We are satisfied with this. The performance is quite good. We don't have any issues regarding the applications that use fat clients. It helps prevent being hacked, and so far we don't have any issues. We can do the encryption of the data. The solution performs quite well. It helps us maintain our systems. Since we have many applications that use images for streaming, it works exceptionally well. We don't have any issues, and this helps us with the service we provide to the hospital.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 most valuable feature of this solution is reliability."

"The most valuable features of Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its superior performance compared to other flash tiers, as well as its ease of use, with an intuitive user interface that is simple to deploy and use."

"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and performance."

"It's helped us because we've changed fundamentally what we talk about. We don't talk about storage and different tiers of storage anymore nor do we talk about servers. We talk now about applications and how applications impact the business and end users."

"Pure FlashArray X NVMe has low latency and high Ops. It is an evergreen model."

"I use the tool for Oracle databases, Oracle virtual machines, and Oracle Linux databases. I'm on the storage side, not a database administrator."

"Everything, especially the VMs inside, is pretty fast."

More Pure FlashArray X NVMe pros

"The most valuable features are that it is easy to implement and configure, easy to use, and really reliable."

"The storage features are valuable."

"We find the product to be very flexible."

"You can easily scale up, and scale-out."

"During the use cases of the solution, its reliability and suitability are the best."

"The features I find most valuable in NetApp NVMe AFF A800 include the part of doing the tiering, NetApp NVMe AFF A800 has helped in enhancing my application performance, and in terms of metrics, I have observed that the latency with NetApp NVMe AFF A800 decreased significantly for us, with the response to read and write being faster, and we are satisfied with the applications."

"Over the eight years, we've been using NetApp with ONTAP, we've never lost a bit of data, and we've only experienced a few minutes of downtime in that entire time."

"NetApp NVMe AFF A800 is easier to use than some other solutions and the UI is very good to use for day-to-day activities. Overall, the solution has good technology."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a product that is fast and provides a fast I/O."

More NetApp NVMe AFF A800 pros

Cons

"There is room for improvement in catering to midrange storage needs, especially for customers seeking Enterprise-class features."

"We would like to see more visibility into garbage collection and CPU performance in the GUI."

"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."

"The software layer has to improve."

"I want to see Pure Storage not only be for fast storage, but I want to see it be for the entire data center."

"The tool's portfolio is minimal. It is expensive."

"In the future, I would like to see integration with enterprise backup systems."

"We've seen that when we create a POD in synchronous mode, it increases the latency."

More Pure FlashArray X NVMe cons

"The security and reporting could be improved."

"For NVMe, the reporting and consolidation dashboard could be improved. The dashboard is not user-friendly. It should be more simplified."

"The support can take a few days to have a response. However, the response that we do receive is very informative."

"The product’s UI could be better."

"Stability is an area with a certain shortcoming where the solution needs to improve"

"Sometimes, it takes a while to get somebody competent on the other end of the line. They do have engineers in multiple time zones around the world. However, their level-one support is not always the best."

"The product's performance has some shortcomings, making it an area that could be a little better."

"The initial setup should be easier, and more like a plug-and-play approach."

"The initial setup is complex."

More NetApp NVMe AFF A800 cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The support cost per array is about $20,000 a year for 24/7 support."

"The product is expensive."

"Given its price, Pure is not the first option."

"Pure FlashArray X NVMe’s pricing is cheaper than other products."

"Our licensing fees are $500,000+ USD."

"As far as the licensing costs, everything is included in the license."

"Pretty much everything that you need is licensed when you buy the product. Licensing to me is different than the maintenance cost, but they can bleed into one another. We buy the product, and we expect three years of support bundled into what we negotiate on our storage arrays. I would start to see maintenance costs going into the fourth year, but we're not there yet."

"With VMware, we pay $300,000 annually."

More Pure FlashArray X NVMe pricing and cost advice

Information not available

"There are licenses for the use of this solution, such as commercial licenses."

"I rate the product’s pricing a seven out of ten."

"Though NetApp NVMe AFF A800 may seem like a highly-priced product, it is not extremely expensive."

"The solution is expensive."

"Considering the requirements and the situation, I don't feel that this is an expensive product."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

No data available

Manufacturing Company

17%

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Educational Organization

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	15
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	12

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	1
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	8

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Pure FlashArray X NVMe?

Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure FlashArray X NVMe?

The price of Pure FlashArray X NVMe is very expensive, though I do not know the actual price because I am using the E...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Pure FlashArray X NVMe?

I have no specific improvements to suggest for Pure FlashArray X NVMe at this time. The performance statistics could ...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp NVMe AFF A800?

The solution is affordable.

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetApp NVMe AFF A800?

For NVMe, the reporting and consolidation dashboard could be improved. The dashboard is not user-friendly. It should ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for NetApp NVMe AFF A800?

We continue with NetApp NVMe AFF A800. We are the client. It is used for storage and backup. Regarding equipment mode...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerStore vs Pure FlashArray X NVMe

Compared 16% of the time

Dell PowerMax vs Pure FlashArray X NVMe

Compared 12% of the time

HPE Alletra Storage vs Pure FlashArray X NVMe

Compared 10% of the time

TrueNAS R-Series vs Pure FlashArray X NVMe

Compared 9% of the time

More Pure FlashArray X NVMe Competitors

No data available

Dell PowerStore vs NetApp NVMe AFF A800

Compared 17% of the time

Huawei OceanStor Dorado vs NetApp NVMe AFF A800

Compared 10% of the time

Dell PowerMax vs NetApp NVMe AFF A800

Compared 9% of the time

NetApp ASA vs NetApp NVMe AFF A800

Compared 8% of the time

NetApp E-Series vs NetApp NVMe AFF A800

Compared 4% of the time

More NetApp NVMe AFF A800 Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure FlashArray X NVMe

January 2026

Download Pure FlashArray X NVMe product report

Buyer's Guide

NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays

January 2026

Download Fungible Storage Cluster [EOL] product report

Buyer's Guide

NetApp NVMe AFF A800

January 2026

Download NetApp NVMe AFF A800 product report

Also Known As

Pure FlashArray//X NVMe, Pure FlashArray//X, FlashArray//X

No data available

Overview

Pure Storage FlashArray//X is the world’s first enterprise-class, all-NVMe flash storage array. It represents a new class of storage – shared accelerated storage, which is a term coined by Gartner – that delivers major breakthroughs in performance, simplicity, and consolidation.

Pure Storage

Fungible Storage Cluster [EOL] is an innovative storage solution designed to optimize data management and address performance bottlenecks, especially for enterprise-level businesses.

Designed to enhance storage efficiency, Fungible Storage Cluster [EOL] utilizes advanced technology to streamline data processing, ensuring improved speed and reduced latency. Its modular architecture enables scalability, making it suitable for businesses looking to maximize their IT infrastructure. By focusing on efficient resource allocation, it provides a pathway for businesses to optimize operations while keeping costs under control.

What are the key features of Fungible Storage Cluster [EOL]?

High Performance: Delivers exceptional speed for data-intensive applications.
Scalability: Modular design allows seamless expansion of storage capacity.
Data Security: Implements robust measures to protect sensitive information.
Resource Efficiency: Optimizes the use of computing resources.

What benefits and ROI should users expect?

Cost Efficiency: Reduces operational expenses through efficient resource use.
Simplified Management: Streamlines storage administration tasks.
Enhanced Performance: Increases application responsiveness.
Reduced Downtime: Improves system reliability and uptime.

In industries such as finance and healthcare, Fungible Storage Cluster [EOL] is implemented to manage large-scale data sets efficiently. Its rapid data processing capabilities are essential for sectors that require high-performance analytics and secure data handling, supporting critical operations and decision-making processes.

Microsoft

Your data is a gold mine. Get the most out of it - faster - with AFF A800. Designed for NVMe media, further accelerated with NVMe/FC connectivity to the host, AFF A800 all-flash systems deliver an incredible sub-200 microsecond latency. Providing more than 11.4M IOPS and 300GB/s throughput in a single cluster, AFF A800 redefines the limit of what’s possible with artificial intelligence and deep learning.

NetApp

Sample Customers

Fremont Bank, Judson ISD, The Nielsen Company

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays

January 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Nutanix and others in NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays vendors and best All-Flash Storage vendors.

We monitor all NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays 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.