Google Cloud Storage vs. Pure Storage FlashBlade

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Google Cloud Storage
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Google Cloud Storage is unified object storage for developers and enterprises.N/A
Pure Storage FlashBlade
Score 9.9 out of 10
N/A
Pure Storage offers FlashBlade, a scale-out file and object storage – architected to consolidate complex data silos (like backup appliances and data lakes) while accelerating tomorrow's discoveries and insights.N/A
Pricing
Google Cloud StoragePure Storage FlashBlade
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Google Cloud StoragePure Storage FlashBlade
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Google Cloud StoragePure Storage FlashBlade
Considered Both Products
Google Cloud Storage
Chose Google Cloud Storage
Google Cloud Storage feels much more intuitive to use versus Amazon S3. I really prefer Google's Node SDK and web interface, and find Google Cloud Platform's access/identity management much more straightforward.
Chose Google Cloud Storage
This software is perfect for the organization where a huge amount of data are generated. The software has the perfect features by which the organization can store their information safely. The software has the features where one can share cloud with colleagues for project …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
Google had the easiest and most secure file sharing abilities, and was a more trusted name for our clients to be assured that their files would remain private.
Chose Google Cloud Storage
We have used Amazon S3 for similar needs, or for solutions that don't support Google Cloud Storage. For us, Google Cloud Storage works much better since it's integrated into Google Cloud Platform. Since we use Google Cloud Platform, Google Cloud Storage is part of our cloud …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
The two services are very comparable, but we have many different services that all run on the Google Cloud Platform and therefore Google Cloud Storage made more sense as our storage solution rather than looking to an outside service like S3. Either one of these options would …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
Google Cloud Storage has been experiencing less technical issues and is more straight forward to use, for our technical team, it saves training time by having a straight forward help and FAQ section. We needed very little training, as opposed to previously used other tools …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
Google Cloud offers Google Cloud Storage, while AWS offers Amazon Simple Storage Services. In Google Cloud services, data transmission is a fully encrypted format on the other hand, in AWS, data transmission is in the general format. Google Cloud volume size is 1 GB to 64 TB …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
The big difference against other competitors that offer a Cloud storage solution, is the fact that Google Cloud Storage and other Google Cloud Platform products are billed in the local currency. This fact saves a lot of money because in some countries we have to pay for …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
Aside from Google Cloud Storage, we've used AWS S3 and have found the two comparable. In fact, GCS is one of a large number of object storage systems that are compatible with S3 (including DigitalOcean Spaces, IBM Cloud Storage, and Azure Blog Storage). When it comes to these …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
Google Cloud Storage effectively outweighs Google Drive's limited capabilities. This software, being a paid version, allows for much room for extra storage space, faster loading times from my experience, and easy sharing features. Compared to Google Drive, Google Cloud Storage …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
I chose Google Cloud Storage due to its implementation with Google Firestore. Both worked off each other and made our connection with Google Firestore a lot simpler.
Chose Google Cloud Storage
Google Cloud Storage is the only right option for media and document files. Unless you need to work with structured information where Cloud SQL or Datastore may be better options, storing files in Cloud Storage is easy and right to the point. Also, prices are worth considering …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
Google Cloud Storage compares very similar to Dropbox. The difference of using Googe Cloud Storage is that it is part of a big bundle of products that you are probably already using. If you are a big Google user then it would make sense to get Google Cloud Storage. This way you …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
Google Cloud Storage is the only one I have tried. But when researching we looked at Google Cloud, as well as Microsoft and Amazon. Google was more expensive, but seemed to be more of what we were looking for. Again, not really my department.
Chose Google Cloud Storage
One drive only offers you 5GB free space when google gives you 15 GB. and google cloud as better performance. even with real-time sync.
Chose Google Cloud Storage
Google Cloud Storage is really a different application. It does not have the data parsing capabilities and it is simply a cold storage option in our use case. This means it is less flexible and has limited uses, but the uses it does have it, performs very well. There is a very …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
Guru and Google Cloud Storage are different in many ways. They are by no means the same product, but our team has begun to move away from Google for our documentation of processes. Guru has a superior system for organizing documents and articles.
Chose Google Cloud Storage
I have used Microsoft One Drive, Dropbox, Box, Amazon Cloud Drive, and Google Cloud Storage. All of this cloud storage software do pretty much does the same thing, but the difference for me is in ease of use— for me the easiest to use is Google Drive. I will say this, I use …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
Easier to set up and has a natural interface that is well known to users so it is easy for them to assimilate. Google Cloud Storage is faster than any other option we tried and works perfectly with our Chromebooks. From an ROI perspective, it is the best option for a medium …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
We tend to only select Google Cloud Storage when we're using other Google products as it makes integration easier -- but we tend not to choose it for situations where we can use a competing offering from Azure or AWS. We tend to implement the most Azure and AWS by far, and …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
We selected GCS vs. others because we decided to use other Google Cloud services. Since we integrated GCS into our tools, we're still using GCS today, even though we've largely transitioned away from Google Compute services. GCS is still a very solid choice, even if your server …
Chose Google Cloud Storage
We ended up with Google Cloud Storage most importantly because we found it far easier to set up, configure, and operate compared to Amazon's offerings. Amazon's many products make it difficult to find just the right one, and from there configuring is overly complicated. In …
Pure Storage FlashBlade
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
Pure Storage FlashBlade provided a flexible and secure solution which these alternatives couldn't quite match. The simple file management system and rapid performance made this solution come out on top for us. The only real benefit over Pure Storage FlashBlade that these other …
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
Pure Storage FlashBlade is in our experience far faster, performance-wise, compared to its close competitors. However, if you factor in any packages you currently have with IBM or AWS for example, you can get more value for money for your data requirements. However, if …
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
Pure Storage FlashBlade is very fast. [It was] simplify with the easy install, easy upgrades, automatic performance.
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
The NetApp All Flash FAS provided similar performance but had a larger footprint.
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
Pure Storage FlashBlade has certainly very good high speeds when compared to its competition. Its performance is at par with the leading competitive storage solutions and in few cases even exceeds the expectations. Pure Storage FlashBlade's support of talented engineers is very …
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
It delivers the following, see below, and this is why it was selected as the platform of choice.
*Supports CIFS, NFS, and object
*Speed and performance
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
We did not evaluate any other products, the FlashBlade has nothing similar in my opinion.
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
Pure Storage FlashBlade provides higher performance than the competition.
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
The NetApp a800 we tested was 14% faster than Pure FlashBlade with NFS workloads. However, NetApp lacked ease of administration and performing simple tasks such as creating multiple NFS volumes required scripting from the command line. Our flashblade contained 15 baldes and our …
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
Flasharray C is the true second-tier storage we were looking for with all the features we need.
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
Prior to FlashBlade, we used Avamar for our enterprise backup solution. While Avamar is a solid product, the FlashBlade provides better and more predictable stable performance. Since owning FlashBlade, we have never had any hardware issues or a drop in performance over time. It …
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
I've used many different file storage systems in the past from various established firms. They all have their place, but in the end, I wanted a vendor and solution that was high performing, stable, cost-efficient, easy to use and manage with a Sales, Account, and Support team …
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
We have Oracle ZFS Appliances and the cost of Flashblade was equivalent to one shelf of SSDs in cost. We shopped Isilon and Oracle Solutions, but FlashBlade had a definite cost/performance advantage.
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
The main difference between them and these mentioned is pure performance. There is no comparing backup and restoration times with competitors. We are talking thrusters vs warp engines here. Data compress and dedupe was for a time when storage came at a premium. Data rehydration …
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
The NetApp All Flash FAS provided similar performance but had a larger footprint.
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
I haven't used others.
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
FlashBlade is high capacity and much higher performance than other disk based NAZ servers.
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
Of all the storage arrays I've used in the last 20+ years, Pure Flashblade and Flasharray are by far the simplest and easiest to configure. By miles and miles, to be frank. Additionally, performing an upgrade to software or firmware on non-Pure storage platforms in the past …
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
Pure is both more expensive and less configurable than the excellent HNAS. However, the HNAS is now dependent upon Hitachi storage. The Flashblade is a self-contained unit, which helps reduce cross-platform lock-in. It's not mandatory to have Pure block storage to use the …
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
Pure is easiest to install and administer making it a perfect fit for our EDA scratch environment. Pure lacks mixed mode support which forces Qualcomm to use NetApp or Isilon for any SMB environments.
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
We did not evaluate other options before purchasing. My personal history is mostly around personal NAS and old platter drive arrays. This thing is light years beyond. Not fair to compare older arrays versus FlashBlade.
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
Performace knocked it out of the park. Our only issue at the time was that ECS wasn't supported with Replication.
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
We considered all of the major manufacturers of storage when we were evaluating our choice of a product to replace our older storage. We considered HP, EMC, DELL, and Netapp-- all of which the team has used at various times. Interestingly enough, initially no one had experience …
Best Alternatives
Google Cloud StoragePure Storage FlashBlade
Small Businesses
Amazon S3 Glacier
Amazon S3 Glacier
Score 9.1 out of 10
Amazon S3 Glacier
Amazon S3 Glacier
Score 9.1 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Azure Blob Storage
Azure Blob Storage
Score 9.7 out of 10
Azure Blob Storage
Azure Blob Storage
Score 9.7 out of 10
Enterprises
Azure Blob Storage
Azure Blob Storage
Score 9.7 out of 10
Azure Blob Storage
Azure Blob Storage
Score 9.7 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Google Cloud StoragePure Storage FlashBlade
Likelihood to Recommend
10.0
(0 ratings)
8.4
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Performance
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
7.8
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Google Cloud StoragePure Storage FlashBlade
Likelihood to Recommend
[Google Cloud Storage is] great for storing and playing large video files, and even sharing them securely with others, whether or not they are part of your organization. No need to download video files before watching, and can also be used to store any other kinds of files.
Read full review
Pure Storage FlashBlade is best for companies that want their data stored and secure. The big storage capacity and cloud integration secure our data and ensure no third-party access without authorization. It provides us a secure data storage services for our objects. Fast and easy to install and easy to use.
Read full review
Pros
  • Really great, easy to use interface helps us manage files easily. Storage is fast and inexpensive, so we don't have to spin up storage instances locally
  • Great set of command-line tools to manage data and storage options via scripts and apps, as well as an SDK means we can build GCS into our orchestration and operations tools
  • Robust integration with other Google cloud tools means that we don't have to think too hard about using GCS for a variety of storage tasks as we interact with other Google services.
Read full review
  • Speed. We are seeing large transactions take very little time.
  • Upgrades- In-place upgrades of both hardware and software are extremely easy.
  • Ease of use- I have several engineers working on this and from setup to day to day operations it is extremely easy to maintain.
Read full review
Cons
  • Sometimes we would find advice for how to do something that wasn't documented in the API, although this was very early on.
  • When we first started using it, Google Cloud Storage was changing a lot, and some of these changes required us to adapt our code to fit them.
Read full review
  • When reporting out a user has exceeded there quote, it only references the UID. It would certainly be nice it calls out the UID name that is clearly present in the Dashboard.
  • The ability to determine a snapshot total size would be helpful.
  • Proactive reachout to discuss new versions and assist in planning the upgrade would be a key win.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
after all of the investment made in the tool and considering how many teams use it I think we would not be likely to move away from this tool. A lot of our information including historical is already here and we are happy with the capabilities of the tool currently
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
Overall I say this product is awesome and very easy to use, and would highly recommend it to other business professionals. I feel that my documents and work product are safe and secure, and that I will find them easily when needed.
Read full review
Good API, multi-protocol support is great.
Read full review
Performance
For performance i give Google Cloud Storage 10 of 10 on performance because even though there are other softwares that do exactly the same thing as Google Drive, it still works exceptionally well. It is very fast, and and far as integration, the only software I have used with it that integrated was Google Docs, and of course it integrates perfectly.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
We have never used official support from Google for our Google Cloud Storage, but there is plenty of documentation in place already. With a small amount of work, anybody should be able to get started. Once needs get more complicated, there is still documentation from Google, but also plenty of community support for common use cases around the internet.
Read full review
Without exception, the contacts with support have been quick and extremely knowledgeable. I do not fear getting an underqualified engineer to assess or work on my arrays. In addition to this support structure, the sales engineers are top notch as well.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
overall I was not directly involved but hears the teams were satisfied with the implementation. the teams that used the tool did not encounter major issues, it was as expected with minor issues and bugs that were resolved later. The more significant learning curve was actually starting to use the tool
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Google Cloud Storage compares very similar to Dropbox. The difference of using Googe Cloud Storage is that it is part of a big bundle of products that you are probably already using. If you are a big Google user then it would make sense to get Google Cloud Storage. This way you can have all of the tools you need under one roof. I selected Google Cloud Storage because I was already using Google's other products and I was very impressed by those products so it was an easy sale.
Read full review
Pure Storage FlashBlade is in our experience far faster, performance-wise, compared to its close competitors. However, if you factor in any packages you currently have with IBM or AWS for example, you can get more value for money for your data requirements. However, if performance is a must, the increased cost is not an issue.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • It allows the use of large Big Query data sets, this enables better data analysis.
  • It helps the business maintain a central storage solution for data.
  • Secure and easy to learn and use, it allows for fast adoption which improves productivity.
  • It does not enable collaboration and has limits on flexibility.
Read full review
  • Pure has greatly narrowed the performance gap between file storage and fiber channel block storage with FlashBlade. Exotic file systems and costly FC fabrics are no longer needed to run performant storage.
  • Training is not required for a storage admin who has never touched a Pure array. Everything is where you would expect to find it.
Read full review
ScreenShots