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

NetApp AFF vs NetApp E-Series comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 5, 2024

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)
NetApp AFF
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
315
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (2nd), NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays (2nd)
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
Unified storage has delivered efficient AI analytics and low latency for critical workloads
There might be some lag or response time with respect to support cases, but even then I will rate it 8.5 out of 10. All of this is the same for all product ranges, whether E-series, NetApp AFF, or FAS series, because they are very efficient to respond. The only reason I rated it 8.5 is because the warehouse for spare parts, when a problem comes, a spare is needed to replace it, for example, a disk. In Pakistan, they have only one warehouse in Karachi. This warehouse manages all the problems when a problem comes. They ship the part based on the customer use case and customer service request. That is the only reason I rate it 8.5 because they have only one warehouse in Pakistan, which is in Karachi. For example, if a problem comes in Islamabad, it will take time to deliver the spare because the part will be shipped from Karachi to Islamabad, which will take around maybe a day. Other OEMs have their warehouses in Islamabad, Lahore, and Karachi also. In terms of part replacement requirements, they are very efficient in that area because they have warehouses in multiple cities of Pakistan.
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

"Pure Storage FlashArray has helped decrease the total cost of ownership because we know what the cost is going to be every year; we don't get any hidden fees or upgrade fees, everything is included in the price."
"It has made working with storage as easy and simple as it should be."
"The code upgrades are very smooth."
"Using this solution has improved our consolidation ratio and it saves us a lot of space."
"Provides fast access and is user-friendly."
"The support has been very good from Pure Storage FlashArray."
"The solution is very reliable."
"They have a very good support system, and the GUI is also very intuitive."
"Before this solution, we had a lot of performance issues, and with this tool, we were able to nail them down to at least 20-30% performance gain."
"This solution has reduced our data center costs because when we went from the 8000 and 3200 series that took us from 20 racks of storage down to two."
"The most valuable features for us are the secure multi-tenancy to Data ONTAP and High Availability built into Data ONTAP that provides almost no downtime."
"Dedupe (cost saving): We were able to achieve a lot more capacity than expected."
"First of all, we have very low latency; we just moved a good piece of our stuff over from spinning disk onto All Flash FAS and now we are screaming, with things really fast and really low utilization."
"We needed something faster than NFC, and we now have a 30 second latency, down from 60 seconds."
"MetroCluster provides business continuity and is a critical part of our contingency setup."
"I would tell potential users that NetApp is one of the best primary storage systems with many good features."
"The overall experience has been positive."
"The Snapshot feature is actually widely used; it is a feature that only NetApp E-Series has and it is quite good."
"Customers go for the E Series if they need backup storage because it is cheap."
"The product is easy to use."
"If we select the best use case for NetApp E-Series based on its intended purpose, I would rate it a ten."
"My customers are satisfied with the performance."
 

Cons

"More cloud connectivity would enhance the solution."
"I would love for them to have a hyper-converged solution."
"I would like a feature to integrate with external or cloud solutions."
"I would rate this solution an eight. To make it a ten it would have to be a little cheaper."
"I would like some form of QoS implemented. As a service provider, it would be beneficial to have it."
"For large storage needs, it is expensive."
"I would like to get a weekly report of how our storage has been used, and if there is any storage sitting there not being used."
"We haven't seen ROI."
"Other than that, if this were a standalone purchase, pricing would definitely be an issue."
"We have run into some pain points. I don't know that it's necessarily NetApp's fault."
"I would like for them to develop the ability to detach the fabric pool."
"Our initial setup involved a lot of development."
"That's what we run into a lot. Our datacenters have a need for more flexible cabling and NetApp has very strict guidelines on what kind of cables you use."
"I just got through the session where it looks like they are going to support Oracle running on Linux with SnapCenter. That is one of the main things that we are hoping to get integrated."
"Tech support is a place where there is room to improve the product experience. The response time when they are busy is not very good."
"I do not like the NetApp GUI. For example, the GUI of ONTAP Command Manager could be better, but the CLI is perfect. With every new version and upgrade, they change things, which makes it messy, and I am not good at working with that."
"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."
"The solution must provide more training courses."
"NetApp should add more production lines to the E series so we can make flexible solutions more easily."
"Though the performance is there, if NetApp wants to be competitive with the others, it must improve their business continuity."
"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."
"Getting through first level to second level takes two hours minimum."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"When you are paying more than you were paying for the storage space, you'd like the cost to be less. If they could get into the spinning disk kind of cost, that would be it."
"Pure Storage is expensive. It comes with features, so you get what you pay for. It is expensive compared to our old storage systems, but from the amount of human effort that you have to pay to babysit a storage system, it reduces that. I don't know if the TCO is reduced, but it's not a concern for us."
"I would rate it a seven out of ten for pricing. It could be improved."
"While it comes with a higher price tag, this investment often translates to significant improvements in performance."
"We feel that the pricing is fair and the licensing process was easy for both."
"Cost-wise, it's been very effective."
"The price of Pure Storage FlashArray is expensive."
"Its price is quite competitive, but there is still scope for better pricing."
"The only area where the product has room for improvement is the cost."
"The price of the upgrading of the solution is high. I could buy a whole unit of All Flash FAS 300 with a shelf for around $285,000. Yet if I want to add one additional shelf, it'll cost me $275,000. So they want you to upgrade by replacing it. It's cheaper to buy a whole new unit than to just scale out. The upside is they last. AFF lasts us three or four years. So that's a good investment."
"Using NetApp, our total cost of ownership decreased by 17%."
"NetApp AFF is an expensive solution."
"Our TCO decreased significantly because we were paying maintenance on nine different arrays throughout the country. We've condensed those down to three arrays, and our maintenance fees from the IBM product dropped by over a half million dollars a year, saving us $500,000 USD."
"All features are included in the license, whereas with an EMC solution, you have to pay separately for extra terabytes."
"The pricing is good."
"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.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user186357 - PeerSpot reviewer
Solutions Architect with 51-200 employees
Jan 28, 2015
NetApp vs. XtremIO
Is there another storage platform as feature rich as NetApp FAS? I think it is fair to say that NetApp FAS running Clustered Data ONTAP is a very feature rich platform – the move to the clustered version of ONTAP has brought many next-generation features including Scale-out and Non-disruptive…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business71
Midsize Enterprise38
Large Enterprise159
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise47
Large Enterprise242
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...
What is the Biggest Difference Between Dell EMC Unity and NetApp AFF?
Well, Is one thing NetApp Storage has vs other brand is the mix of protocol CIFS with NFS booth working together in t...
What is the Biggest Difference Between Dell EMC Unity and NetApp AFF?
This question is very dependent on your requirements. Both are among the best in the field. Of course, the intended c...
What is the Biggest Difference Between Dell EMC Unity and NetApp AFF?
The answer depends on your needs and budget. If you want high performance (who doesn't) or let's say the latency matt...
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
NetApp All Flash FAS, NetApp AFF, NetApp Flash FAS
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
DreamWorks Animation, FICO, Yahoo! Japan
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp AFF vs. NetApp E-Series and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.