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

HPE EVA [EOL] vs NetApp FAS Series comparison

 

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

HPE EVA [EOL]
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
NetApp FAS Series
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
Deduplication Software (4th), NAS (3rd), Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2268315 - PeerSpot reviewer
Deputy General Manager & Enterprise Head at a security firm with 501-1,000 employees
Has the ability to automatically deal with faulty disks
In terms of the most beneficial features of the product, I would say that during the faulty disk replacement process, the tool automatically ungroups the faulty disk, so from the tool itself, anybody can identify which disk is faulty and then repair it. The data replication part is not enabled in the product that I use since the DRP feature is not enabled. I work with the product's high availability feature. Considering the size of the environment where the product is used, the product offers around 80 to 90 TB of storage space. I won't recommend the product to others who plan to use it. The implementation process of the product would be as per the standard of the organization where it is going to be used. Everyone should have their own organizational data structure as per the data orientation needs. I rate the tool an eight out of ten.
Srikanth Purushothaman - PeerSpot reviewer
DIRECTOR at Vellore Online Systems
Has supported long-term data protection and backup while requiring better part availability and pricing options
For monitoring purposes, we normally use flash access storage exclusively. We utilize a hybrid system because we need performance, combining NL-SAS for the volume and SAS flash to use as a fast cache system that provides more IOPS. We normally implement RAID 10, which we prefer over RAID 6's n plus 2 combinations. We utilize it for data redundancy, even with write intensity on. Regarding the unified storage architecture for NetApp FAS Series, we normally opt for exclusivity unless budget constraints exist. Our IOPS are very high, reaching somewhere about 50k to 150k or 1.150k. The high performance ensures minimal latency. An advantage we've seen with NetApp FAS Series is that snapshots provide very rapid backup and fast recovery. We basically use snapshots for data protection as first-level protection, with deduplication between the two storages serving as second-level protection.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"​HPE has reliable support for HDD replacement.​"
"My most important criteria when selecting a vendor are price, dedupe, and compression."
"There have been no fail-stop failures for the last five years."
"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."
"It's fast, reliable, and it's very good for the price."
"We cannot stop this SAN array; it has never failed since it was started, and we have not had a problem with it at all."
"A reliable and easily managed storage system is a key performance factor. The system also has more features than we require."
"The strong point is that our clients like this are RadLV (Radiology Low-Value). They also use SnapMirror and MetroCluster."
"Using the built-in Snapshots and SnapMirror technology, we were able to have better working data protection locally and off-site."
"The most valuable feature of the NetApp FAS Series is the snapshot and the FlexClone for Oracle and Microsoft SQL environments. Additionally, the integration can be done with most all on-premise and cloud providers."
"It gives us the performance we need and the reliability we need to make sure that our systems have the uptime that our internal customers demand."
"Our business has grown two and half times in size over six years, and we’ve added more disks and shelves, as well as upgrading controllers, and we’ve done it without any down time."
"Adaptive balancing is a valuable feature."
"The most important features are SnapVault, Snapshots, and SnapMirror."
 

Cons

"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."
"I faced some issues during the disk replacement process in HPE EVA."
"In general, my boss feels that HPE's prices are very high."
"It could be just this particular model, but the storage is not so stable."
"For long term partnership in Myanmar, the local warehouse should be built in Myanmar that's something I'd like to see. We have some issues with supply so there is sometimes a delay in getting the hardware."
"The current snapshot technology in VMFS is to say the least very poor – best practice is to have no more than 2-3 snapshots in a chain (even though the maximum is 32) and to use no single snapshot for more than 24-72 hours – the reason is simple, storage performance will suffer if you create a snapshot on a VM."
"The product should improve its user experience."
"The product should include an audit log feature."
"Some of the tools could be improved like NetApp OnCommand. This has been a lot better recently, but they could make it faster."
"The process for going to cluster mode is expensive."
"The solution could do more than just data."
"The product must support more drives."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Most storage vendors also have software, or licensing bundles, which may offer the required licenses considerably cheaper, but do also maybe offer licenses, which are not needed."
"The pricing of NetApp FAS Series is reasonable for its performance."
"The process for going to cluster mode is expensive."
"In general, I find NetApp to be very expensive. That's the main issue I have with them. So it's a drawback in terms of pricing."
"The only area that could be improved is to lower prices for their All Flash FAS."
"The price, compared to competitors, is quite high."
"NetApp FAS Series' pricing is competitive."
"The licensing cost is on yearly basis."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business31
Midsize Enterprise38
Large Enterprise58
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Which SAN product would you choose: IBM FlashSystem (FS9500) vs PureFlash Array/X NVMe vs PureFlash Array/XL NVMe?
Have you considered a NetApp FAS Storage for your NAS needs? I am sure it fits very well.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp FAS Series?
I do not handle the pricing part of NetApp FAS Series since it is managed by the sales team.
What needs improvement with NetApp FAS Series?
There is room for improvement when it comes to response time and first-level support quality. If a new feature needs to be added, it takes some time because it is altogether a new development; othe...
 

Also Known As

EVA P6000 series, HP EVA
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bank Simpanan Nasional, EDF, Saint Mary's University, Thomson Reuters
Children's Hospital Central California, Plex Systems, PDF PNI Digital Media, Denver Broncos, PDF KSM Legal, Clayton Companies, Virginia Community College
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, IBM and others in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network). Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.