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
Quantum StorNext
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
StorNext, from Quantum, is file system software.
N/A
Pricing
Pure Storage FlashBlade
Quantum StorNext
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Pure Storage FlashBlade
Quantum StorNext
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Pure Storage FlashBlade
Quantum StorNext
Considered Both Products
Pure Storage FlashBlade
Verified User
Anonymous
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 …
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 …
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 …
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
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 …
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 …
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 …
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.
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 …
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 …
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 …
IT Hardware Engineer/Storage Architect - Senior Staff Member
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.
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.
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 …
Our first shared storage was from Facilis. This is a great company, with great hardware and software, of which we use in our NYC office. At the time, it did what we needed it to do and performed smoothly. But then our workflow expanded dramatically and needed to look for the …
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.
Quantum StorNext is well suited in environments with a high, fast paced workflow, with lots and lots of client systems connected, all needing to share the same assets, where you cannot have one moment of downtime. With the pace nowadays that clients expect work to get done, as opposed to 10 years or so ago (pre-iPhone social media instant instant gotta have it right away days), even downtime of 30 minutes can back up your whole workflow. As they say, time is money and Quantum StorNext almost certainly guarantees you have little to no downtime at all. It just works, silently, quietly in the background, making sure everyone is performing at 100% of their potential or more.
Quantum StorNext just works and by that, I mean it just works flawlessly in the background, while your artists are doing their creative work on jobs with clients. Technical issues and hold-ups should never get in the way of the creative process.
There is a lot of flexibility with StorNext and options available in software and hardware, to customize the best solution for your workflow.
Great customer support and response times when things do need supporting, whether there is an issue with a piece of hardware (i.e. battery backup to a controller unit that needs replacing). Quantum along with our local support vendor are fast to respond.
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.
Price. Obviously, when you are at the level of performance that is needed for our work, Quantum can only go so low as a company on cost, to give their customers a blockbuster deal. But any possible discount here and there helps, and Quantum does their best to lower it as low as possible with bundles and pricing deals. By no means is price a deterring factor, for if you are playing at this level (Ferrari vs Camaro), you know it's going to expensive, but it's a solid investment if you want the reliability and performance. And it's actually cheaper when you compare it to other competitors, along with upgrade paths down the road that will cost you less.
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.
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.
Our first shared storage was from Facilis. This is a great company, with great hardware and software, of which we use in our NYC office. At the time, it did what we needed it to do and performed smoothly. But then our workflow expanded dramatically and needed to look for the level of SANs in the Quantum range. We passed our Facilis along to the NYC office and ended up getting an Active Storage SAN, which ran on StorNext. That company unfortunately went out of business a few years back (they are back in business within the last year, but I think Chinese owned), so we looked into getting a fully integrated all-in-one Quantum system that included its branded storage and MDCs to work with StorNext.
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.
Quantum StorNext has allowed us to not only perform at a higher level, but greatly expand how many client systems are connected to the SAN. Prior to Quantum, our old SAN could barely handle the workload of half the client systems we have now. So for ROI, I'm not involved with the actual numbers, but I know our work with clients has expanded ten fold and there is no sign of it slowing down.
Confidence and my time not wasted, working with the support vendors to solve a problem. My time is then spent on other areas and projects in the company, not on phone calls and emails.