IBM System Storage DS5000 Series Reviews

We use IBM System Storage DS5000 Series for our data center infrastructure and all the servers. We use it with IBM and other vendors, including VMware. Especially VMware clusters and IBM Power machines.

I like that it's stable, and I am satisfied with it. We have had some issues, but that is normal in IT. IBM System Storage DS5000 works fine most of the time.

IBM System Storage DS5000 is expensive when compared to other vendors.

I have used IBM System Storage DS5000 Series for over ten years.

IBM System Storage DS5000 is a stable solution.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give stability a nine.

IBM System Storage DS5000 is a scalable solution. You can buy additional hardware and plug it into the existing system to extend it.

Compared to other vendors, I think it's expensive.

I would recommend this solution to potential users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give IBM System Storage DS5000 a ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is storage for a virtualized environment, whereby we have storage that acts as a pool of resources whereby you can create a server. The solution is deployed on-premises.

We have found storage virtualization valuable, and its disks can be shared with many host machines. Hence, allowing us to virtualize and share. For example, you may have 30 hosts like VMware, and you can easily virtualize and share the storage.

The amount of storage could be increased.

We have been using the solution for four years.

The solution is very stable.

The solution is scalable and there are currently 50 end users utilizing the solution in our organization.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. I rate them a ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward and it took six hours to deploy.

We implemented via a consultant.

The license is affordable.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The solution is good but the amount of storage can be improved.

It can fit many use cases. We sell the IBM System Storage DS5000 Series to midmarket companies. However, it's a very enterprise-like product, so it covers many companies here in Denmark.

Some service providers use it for on-premises daily work with CIM systems, minor ERP systems, Office, etc. We have production companies that use it as well.

It's very competitive in terms of price.

I also like all the software features you get from the IBM System Storage DS5000 Series such as the SVC (SAN volume controller). You can put the code on the controllers, and it really gives you the advantage because you'll have HyperSwap.

There are other features that are really nice for the low-end market as well because they use A2A systems.

IBM talks about integration when we talk about Safeguarded Copy. It integrates with QRadar, but it seems as though IBM still is too separate, that is, the way IBM is measured on software and hardware.

There is integration between the hardware and the Safeguarded Copy. When you use it together with QA, log management, and prices, it takes too long to fulfill it, and we end up doing it ourselves.

With regard to software bundles and where to find them, there are still some difficulties.

IBM's competitors bundle their products with servers. Though the IBM System Storage DS5000 Series is a much better product, not being able to bundle it with a server has been an issue.

IBM should have more integration between their departments so that problems can be solved in a timely manner.

We have been using this solution for 15 to 20 years.

It's a great product in terms of stability.

The scalability is great.

We sell to Iceland, Faroe Islands, and Greenland, but we need a local presence in these countries in order to quickly deliver products. We have had a lot of problems competing in these markets because of this issue.

The initial setup for the DS5000 Series is easy. I would rate it at four out of five.

It is a competitively priced solution. The cost can vary depending on whether it is purchased from the hardware or the software departments.

IBM System Storage DS5000 Series is a great product, and I would rate it at nine on a scale from one to ten.

We primarily use this solution for virtual desktop (VDI).

The most valuable feature is compression.

It would be nice if duplication was possible at the hardware level. As it is now, duplication is a software feature, whereas compression is a hardware feature.

We have been using the IBM System Storage DS5000 Series for approximately five years.

This is a stable product and we use it extensively. The is little or no maintenance required.

This solution is scalable and we have at least 1,000 users. In the future, we will likely add another system.

We were only in contact with technical support once. We thought that we had a problem but they solved our issue very quickly.

Last year, we purchased the newer 8000 series model from IBM.

We are also using the Dell 4000 series. It was the Dell 4020 that we initially started with.

In total, we are using one system from Dell and three systems from IBM. All of them are operational.

We prefer IBM to Dell because of the ratio of price to performance. Essentially, IBM has more aggressive pricing. 

The initial setup is easy.

The last deployment we did was by our in-house team.

This product is priced well. The ratio between cost and productivity is very high and we're happy with it.

In summary, this is a good product. They have also added some extra security features, and we like them very much. As an example, we didn't ask for it, but they implemented a helpful feature to fight against ransomware. This adding of features is quite nice.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

It's a storage box with multiple loft space. It is connected with the fiber optic solution. We have fiber optic switches and they are directly connected with that.

We also do the flash copy using that storage. For example, I will read the data backup of our current system and store it on the back. There's one wall of volume over there, which will boot when we are taking a backup and then it shut down automatically. After that, we can make a copy on a tape. 

The DS 5000 series never has any problems. It's extremely reliable. One time I saw that there was one issue and I didn't remove it. There was an amber light that popped up. I just played with the issue and just fixed it and it was easy. Since then we really don't have any issues.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

The product is very costly. Very few can afford it. 

The renewal or maintenance of the solution is also expensive. Once things come down, users tend to look to other options.

The solution needs better alerts. If there is a problem, there needs to be a good alert system in place.

I've been using the solution for a couple of years now.

The stability is excellent. It's reliable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We basically just install it and we can forget we even have it.

The scalability is great. It's not a problem to scale if you need to.

Everything is on the local machine. We wanted to fix that due to the fact that every time we needed the space we had to change a whole box, which was too costly. However, if we need space, we can just install the drives. We are using five hard drives with 12 drives still empty. We can use those at any time to increase the space.

I've never had the chance to talk to technical support. We have absolutely no problems with the solution, and due to the fact it hasn't given us any issues, we've never had to contact them. Therefore, I can't speak to their level of service or their responsiveness.

We didn't previously use a different solution. We've only had IBM from the very beginning.

The installation is pretty straightforward. It's not too complex so long as you are comfortable with IBM. For us, it's not the device that's difficult. It's more about the setup we have.

The pricing is very costly. It's roughly $6,000-$7,000. The solution is not cheap. 

We aren't partners with IBM. We don't have a business relationship. We're just customers.

I'd advise others that there are a lot of solutions available on the market. IBM is not their only option.

Overall, it's a great, robust solution. I'd rate it, on a scale from one to ten, at an eight.

We use it for block storage.

The stability and performance of the drive are the most valuable.

IBM is not always as agile as other competitors when it is about cloud integration and user interfaces. They're not renewing themselves very often. They have been slow to evolve from the old GUI. The user interface should be improved, especially regarding performance analysis, which has always been a little bit weak as compared to other solutions.

As a global solution, it lacks the feature for containing integration object storage. Even though they have now started to offer this feature, it is quite young and not as developed as some other vendors. There are also no mass possibilities at all. 

They have a lot of competition in the mid-range segment. They need to have a NAS gateway or something like that. It doesn't specifically need to be integrated into the controllers that are keys to the gateway.

We have it in the company for a long time, but I have been working on it for like one year.

It is a very stable solution.

We are using it for our Oracle database as well as for MySQL database, so it is being used for a really high-end environment. We have maybe 2,000 people who are using this system through the database.

I am always happy with their technical support.

We're a team of five, but we're not only handling this product. We are also working on Hitachi, IBM, and NetApp products.

Its price is fair. IBM is quite fair in price when you compare it with others. 

We also use Hitachi internally, and Hitachi is always a little bit more expensive. NetApp is also a bit more expensive. So, IBM has good positioning in terms of price.

It is very strong in block storage for the database environment. It has very good quality because the compression, deduplication, and encryption are directly done by the disks, so there is no penalty on the processes of all controllers.

If you need a platform that is oriented towards block storage and has features like multi-protocol, cloud integration, and so on, I don't think this is the best solution. It doesn't have direct NAS protocols or things like this.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten, specifically for the needs of block storage. Its performance is very good, which is the biggest asset of this solution. However, it doesn't provide enough services, which probably solutions like NetApp or Dell are providing.

Regarding the use cases, we have a database with not more than sixty servers on it.

Our current system is outdated, almost full, and has limitations with storage. Therefore, replacing the current system with a new one is the only solution. The solution's scalability can also be improved.

I didn't make the comparison between the solution and other brands because I'm just preparing the document considering our requirements.

I have been using the IBM PowerStorage DS5000 Series for a month.

The solution is stable. I rate its stability a nine out of ten.

The solution is not flexible enough. I cannot move the machine as I want. So that is not scalable. Also, there is a limitation of the storage on the device. So I cannot upgrade it.

Approximately 200 users within our organization are using this solution on a daily basis.

I have used Dell SAN storage.

The initial setup is straightforward. The solution was deployed on the cloud.

It's an expensive solution.

I suggest looking for the latest version of this solution.

The solution is reliable. It only has a limitation with the storage. When we reach the maximum storage, we need to replace the system. We cannot take a standard one.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

The solution is quite robust and complex. You can do a lot of things with it.

The stability is excellent.

I find the solution isn't so easy to understand. A user must be quite knowledgeable in the product. It isn't like HPE 3PAR, which you can use quite easily without too much storage experience. In that solution, you can just simply follow instructions. 

They need to add instructions inside the storage the way 3PAR has them. If they can add this usability on the storage web console, it will be very easy to follow.

While I've worked with IBM quite a bit, I'm not really using it so much now. I am helping a client with it. I'm much more comfortable with HPE products.

We've never had stability issues with the solution. There aren't bugs or glitches. It's stable and reliable. It doesn't crash.

On the customer's side, as far as I remember, there were about three disk shells and one controller shelf. I didn't experience any kind of add-on for their storage in that case. As far as I know, however, If he or she would want to go and add some disk shelf on the storage, it's not easy.

I have some experience with HPE 3PAR and Storwize 7000. Both have similar usability and nearly the same storage capacity. They are really easy if you just follow the instructions. This is not the case with the DS 5000 series from IBM.

I've also worked with the SC series of Dell Compellent. It's also really good for any kind of usage. It's so easy to add anything on the shelf due to the fact that you have many of the instructions on the screen to follow. When you follow these instructions, you can easily add or remove a disk shelf.

With the Turkish currency, it's hard to nail down the exact pricing. It fluctuates and the costs are based on the US dollar. Right now, it's fluctuating so much, you can't really do a comparison using the Turkish lira. That said, I would estimate that the cost is a bit lower compared to other models. 

Currently, we don't sell IBM products, although I've worked with IBM via clients.

The customer is still working with the storage. I have experienced full replacements with it. The customer had a problem with it and they had to replace the controller.

I prefer HPE 3PAR for managing. 3PAR has many specifications on the storage web console. You can do anything and analyze everything from there. With IBM you must know the system quite well. You must have some experience in order to use it effectively.

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate this solution at a seven. If they improved the usability by adding instructions into the console, I'd probably rate them a nine.