"The performance of IBM FlashSystem is very good. The new technology and high throughput have given us more confidence in the solution. The management of the system has improved and we can control the monitoring system alerts and multiple FlashSystems with the Enterprise Cloud Edition, which is free. The migration of recently stored data to a new flash is much easier. You can move your data because you can utilize it externally."
"No queuing and high ops, speed, and performance."
"The most valuable features are deduplication and compression, which together, enable you to have more space."
"IBM's technical support do excellent work."
"The price-performance ratio is most valuable."
"Most of the features for the reduction in data compression are useful. It is also very easy to use and administer. Its performance is also good."
"The most valuable features in IBM FlashSystem are IOPS, performance, duplication, and compression."
"The compression and deduplication features are the most valuable."
"Can use both SAN and NAS at the same time."
"I like the unified management feature because sometimes you end up running a single protocol on the entire system."
"You can use different protocols at the same time. Monitoring is also very easy in NetApp FAS Series. There is a free tool for monitoring."
"I like it. When it is up and running, it does the job."
"The solution is easy to use."
"I have found all the features useful in NetApp FAS Series."
"The most valuable features are the NAS features and NetApp's excellent support."
"The most valuable feature for us is the combining of HA and SnapMirror."
"It could be easier to implement."
"A big area for improvement is that the data reduction pool feature is not recommended for use in a production environment because it has stability and performance issues."
"Sometimes the performance is effective but it gets resolved in the process."
"The solution is not easy to use and could improve."
"They can include Amazon file system S3 protocol in the upcoming releases. It is a cloud file system. IBM FlashSystem doesn't have this feature in the box for high-end or mid-range. We have got requests for this from customers because we need to use S3 for EDI application storage. At the beginning of every year, IBM releases firmware. When I find any bugs in the firmware during the year, I am unable to find any information from IBM regarding the bug. I need to open a ticket, and the IBM engineering team makes a patch only for me. This patch is not public. By creating a customized patch for a client, they don't really solve the issue for everyone. If multiple users have the same bug, IBM should upload the patch on the official website so that we can download it. IBM FlashSystem has a monitoring tool in the box, but it is not advanced. I need a more advanced tool for more advanced equations and monitoring. All top three storage vendors, that is, EMC, IBM, and Pure Storage, don't have a powerful monitoring tool. To monitor our box to show the statistics for I/Os and latency, I need to pay for extra software. The built-in monitoring storage is not mature enough to handle all requests and generate all reports that I need. They can include the functionality to stretch a cluster natively without using any additional boxes. In addition, there are some features that EMC has integrated with the box. These features are not available in IBM FlashSystem."
"The installation is not easy. You need to have extensive knowledge to handle it."
"The pricing could be improved, but I think it's getting better and better with each version. IBM needs to implement NAS storage again, as this is a big flaw. Dell EMC is very good at this and if you compared them based on NAS storage, Dell EMC would win right away. IBM's solution for NAS storage is very complicated. We don't have a storage box that provides file sharing from itself, we have to put software on it and go through a whole complicated process. It should be simplified."
"The data reduction pool feature sucks and is not recommended for use with heavy workloads."
"The user interface could be improved."
"If our customer needs a high-performance storage solution then we don't recommend this product."
"Currently, the newest release is not HCI friendly."
"Interfacing with the cloud environment could be better. I want to be able to move some cloud volume and integrate it seamlessly with my home on-premise storage. Sometimes I have issues with port permissions. NetApp probably needs to improve more on the integration side from on-premise to the cloud."
"Its operating system is very cumbersome. However, after you set it up, it runs pretty smoothly. Its file system is not very dynamic. It is very static."
"The one aspect of the solution that's negative for us is also more unique to us due to the fact that we did a MetroCluster. The tiebreaker piece that does the monitoring of the two different locations, and determines if one is not talking to the network normally (or if it's truly down) is a little difficult. It feels like it was not designed from the beginning to fit well into the other pieces. It feels like it was thrown in at the last minute and it is not smooth."
"We're supposed to have used NetApp FAS Series for replication, but then one of the nodes failed, and then it's taken us some time to bring it up."
"Its licensing cost can be improved."
IBM FlashSystem products are enterprise computer data storage systems that store data on flash memory chips. Unlike storage systems that use standard solid-state drives, IBM FlashSystem products incorporate custom hardware based on technology from the 2012 acquisition of Texas Memory Systems. This hardware provides performance, reliability, and efficiency benefits versus competitive offerings.
IBM FlashSystem is ranked 2nd in NAS with 27 reviews while NetApp FAS Series is ranked 5th in NAS with 17 reviews. IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.4, while NetApp FAS Series is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "Good performance, energy efficient with a small form factor, helpful support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp FAS Series writes "Resilient without disrupting the user experience and very stable". IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Pure Storage FlashArray, Dell EMC PowerStore, Dell EMC Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage and HPE 3PAR StoreServ, whereas NetApp FAS Series is most compared with Dell EMC PowerScale (Isilon), HPE StorageWorks MSA, Dell EMC PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), FreeNAS and Qumulo. See our IBM FlashSystem vs. NetApp FAS Series report.
We monitor all NAS 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.