Quick tech specs
- 256 GB
- 16GB Fibre Channel
- 2 x RAID
- X hot-swap
Know your gear
NetApp All Flash FAS AFF8080 EX HA with Expanded I/O - NAS server - rack-mountable - RAID 4, 6, DP - RAM 256 GB - 10 Gigabit Ethernet / 16Gb Fiber Channel / FCoE - iSCSI - 12U
Contact Sales Assistance
(800) 800-4239, Monday-Friday 7am-7:30pm CT
(800) 800-4239, Monday-Friday 7am-7:30pm CT
NetApp All Flash FAS EX HA with Expanded I/O - NAS Server is rated 4.80 out of 5 by 8.
Rated 5 out of 5 by reviewer2039343 from Easy to use, lowers transactional speed, and helps optimize costs What is our primary use case? We primarily use the solution for databases, including Oracle, SQL, PostgreSQL, and VMware. We're moving some data warehouses over as well as our main financial system. What is most valuable? The NVMe flash cache is the most useful feature. It lowers transactional speed even more. We have found the ease of use to be excellent. Everybody's got expertise in it. AFF helped reduce our operational latency. Since we started using it, we've improved by 20%. AFF has helped us optimize our costs. We partnered with StorageGRID on that, and so we tier our data with StorageGRID and use AFF for the hot data, and then we tier it off to StorageGRID, which is really helping with that. What needs improvement? I do not have any notes for areas of improvement. There's a lag with StorageGRID. It's off of this tier-three disc. After a few days, we sluff it off to StorageGRID, and then if all of a sudden, they need to restore that data, it takes a while to spin it back up and write it back to that. What would be great is if they could actually make StorageGRID so that it's pretty fast and has a fast recall. That being said, that's a recovery issue. In the past, NetApp designed it so that you have a 70% threshold. You would never fill up past 70% since you need to have that room available. Whereas with Pure, I can fill it up to 110% of what they listed and it's still going at full speed. NetApp can't do that. They need to build in more capacity to ensure users don't lose 30% of a buffer off the top. For how long have I used the solution? I've been using the solution for six years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? The stability is fantastic. They're really coming as close to a high availability system as you can get. In the past, with the controller failover, you'd have to rely on the other controller. It was a little bit hit or miss. AFF has really stepped it up to where I'm not lagging on performance when it fails over if it's an upgrade, update, or something like that. I don't have to worry as much about controller failure anymore. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? Scalability is great. It's just expensive. That's why we would go with StorageGRID. Due to supply chain issues, I already know that these flash drives are so expensive. We're paying through the roof for those drives even on a discount. Therefore, while scalability's great, we can't really afford it. I can't go and buy a $4 million system. How are customer service and support? Technical support is pretty good. It is hit or miss. For the most part, it's good. The main complaints I get from the engineers are that they'll just say, "it's a future release, and that future release is just too far down the road, and we need to get that done right away." Whereas we see a pain point now, and we would like to see them fix our problems right now. That said, we understand we're not the biggest customer on planet earth. How would you rate customer service and support? Neutral Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch? Before AFF, we used Hitachi. We switched to simplify from the fiber channel over to NAS. We were looking to simplify and make the network the cost point instead of having fibre channel expertise and network expertise. How was the initial setup? I was not involved in the initial setup of the solution. What was our ROI? We've probably optimized our costs by 70%. We have seen ROI in terms of less latency on applications and users being able to get more done more quickly. The experience is really good with StorageGRID unless you're doing restores, and then they've got to restore that data. That's the only thing that's lagging. That said, the return on investment has been great since the DBAs and the other customers get more done and get more cycles accomplished with that enhanced IOP performance. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? The pricing is palatable; we can swallow it. We're a longtime customer and we view our relationship as a partnership, not just a one-time deal. They have taken good care of us. Which other solutions did I evaluate? We looked at Dell, Pure, and EMC, among other options. I like Pure. Pure has very low-cost copies of point-in-time databases that they can spin up immediately, and the developers, the database administrators, can have that hanging off the same disc at a low cost. It's just built off of the existing data, and I haven't seen NetApp come up with anything like that yet. The Snapshotting, SnapMirror, SnapVault technologies, and just having all of those technologies, are really nice so that we can get a copy, SnapMirror, for example, in the data center, and we can have that spun up really quick. That's NetApp's technology and that's the advantage there. What other advice do I have? I have not used BlueX, their cloud management aspect. We haven't seen any ransomware attacks. Security's pretty closed off. They're not going to tell us if something happens, so it's hard to gain visibility. We'll just know that we've got to do a restore or something. That said, we haven't lost anything. We do not use any other NetApp cloud services. We just use StorageGRID and the AFF right now. FSX looks intriguing. We'd be willing to test it in the future. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It's a good product. Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2022-12-05T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by reviewer2039358 from Great speed, easy to set up, and offers excellent throughput What is our primary use case? We use the solution for virtualization. We run VMware on it. How has it helped my organization? Before running AFF we ran regular SAS Disk Arrays. NetApp AFF greatly improved the performance. What is most valuable? The speed is great. That's probably number one in terms of features we appreciate. The throughput is excellent. It's useful for running production databases on. NetApp AFF has reduced our operational latency. It has close to doubled it. What needs improvement? The setup process could be easier. For how long have I used the solution? I used NetApp AFF for six years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? I never had any major outages or issues with the platform. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? Scaling is easy enough. Users can just throw another shelf in. It's easy to add hardware. How are customer service and support? Support is good. I've never had any issues long term. How would you rate customer service and support? Positive Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch? We've used Dell EMC in the past, and we use Pure now. Pure is easier to manage just from an interface perspective, however, I would say the performance of both is close to equal. We chose AFF primarily for the level of performance. That said, the team that works for me has more experience with Pure. The issue we have is that the footprint is way smaller. How was the initial setup? I was involved in the initial deployment of AFF. I've done it quite a few times and I find the process to be straightforward. The deployment could be easier. Pure setup is way easier in comparison but I had no problem setting AFF up. The initial setup has a lot more steps in it than are probably necessary for a base deployment, unlike other vendors where it's more straightforward. It could be a little bit more streamlined. What about the implementation team? I handled the deployment myself. What was our ROI? We haven't quite witnessed an ROI. Eventually, it becomes cheaper as we go along instead of going all cloud, however, in the end, it's probably pretty close to equal. They sped everything up initially. However, are there other products that have a better ROI? Maybe. Pure probably has a better ROI overall and especially when you start talking about Pure Evergreen and the way that they do their maintenance. That's a big difference that helps a little bit with the cost long term. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? The pricing is pretty in line with industry standards. Which other solutions did I evaluate? We did not evaluate other storage issues. What other advice do I have? We are a NetApp customer. So far, the solution has not optimized our costs. Since using the solution, we have not been hit by ransomware. We do not use any other NetApp cloud solutions together with AFF. In terms of rating the product by itself, I would give it a nine out of ten due to some of the usability differences that I know now. Overall, against other vendors, I would probably rate it eight out of ten based on the footprint size and some of the longer-term support features. Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2022-12-06T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by reviewer2039352 from Reliable, reduces latency, and offers good support What is our primary use case? We primarily use the solution for SQL server-based applications. How has it helped my organization? The last customer I worked with wanted to improve the performance of SQL responses. They were having issues with multiple SQL statements taking time. Although it's not just a hardware-only solution, they had to do both, which meant replacing their previous hardware and, at the same time, improving their queries. That combination was most important for the customer. What is most valuable? Since I know NetApp's systems, staying with NetApp was one of the best features. For example, Flash is the solution for latency. It reduces latency. The SQL server benefits from all-flash storage, and NetApp is among the most responsive. I actually did major projects where we used NetApp storage for some government agencies, and we were able to keep the storage where the government or the customer is able to own the storage while using AWS as their computing. That part was helpful to the customer. What needs improvement? The improvement I would like to see is not just about NetApp. Rather, it's about improving the hardware itself in terms of its lifecycle. How long is it going to stay as responsive, for example. Their rates have improved; however, there is still room to improve. I'd like to see them continue with scalability and have the ability to scale more. Hopefully, it gets more compact than it actually is for the scale that we're looking for. When it comes to the cloud, they might need to improve in terms of making it clear why someone would use a NetApp solution over cloud-made storage. That part either needs to have improved technology or improved visibility to the customer. Why should I use that instead of something that seems to be less expensive? They need to explain that more than simply saying ROI is good and the TCO is good. People need a little bit more. It's not easy in this space for people to choose a product. When you go online, you want to have a simple way to choose. For how long have I used the solution? I've been using the solution for about five years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? The solution is stable. It's reliable. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? The scalability is good with NetApp. It's fine for most people. There would be some places where it would be difficult, whatever you do. We tend to work with environments based on petabytes. How are customer service and support? I like NetApp support. They're very consistent. It's not only the NetApp hardware that you get support with. It's also within that area where NetApp's hardware is, and even software is involved in a total solution with third parties. NetApp's support cares about the total solution and is willing to help. There are always issues of who should be the right person to address items. Sometimes there's making sure that whoever owns this error is the person you're working with. It takes someone with experience from the customer perspective to know that it will be better if you work with NetApp on that level. That being said, sometimes it can get difficult. How would you rate customer service and support? Positive Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch? I did previously use another storage solution. I have been using NetApp for more than 20 years, and I know NetApp's technologies and support. There is reliability that there is going to be a continuation of technology, and so those are reasons why I continue to choose the solution. How was the initial setup? The initial setup process is okay. If you are experienced, it is fine. While it's not easy, with the instructions they have, it's straightforward. It just takes some level of expertise or experience in NetApp solutions to be able to do it. What was our ROI? NetApp AFF optimized our customers' costs - or at least, the customer believes so. I didn't do a first-time TCO or ROI. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? The pricing of the solution could be improved to better favor the customer. What other advice do I have? Since we've implemented NetApp AFF our clients have not been affected by ransomware attacks. My customer is not in that position, as they would be on-prem and unconnected. We do use other NetApp services, mostly around volumes and cloud solutions. I have not had any hands-on experience with object storage yet. I'd rate the solution an eight out of ten. Disclaimer: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:Partner
Date published: 2022-12-06T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by reviewer2039376 from Optimizes costs and overall storage and makes migrating to the cloud easy What is our primary use case? We share data between systems as well as sharing data between our off-brand mainframe. How has it helped my organization? We got AFF as an upgrade from our existing older platform. We used to have an older version of NET. We had NET 7 Mode, and we had it for a very long time. AFF gave us a lot more performance. It is just a more reliable platform. What is most valuable? The Snapshots and just the overall flexibility of the product have been great. Using AFF helped reduce our cost of licensing. AFF has helped us with saving or optimizing our costs. We have been able to optimize overall storage. So far, we have not been affected by ransomware attacks since implementing AFF. Being based on ONTAP makes migrating to the cloud much easier to take advantage of. We can figure out the cloud SVMs in a very similar fashion. That's been a big help. It's a technology we already know, so we can pretty much apply anything from ONFREM to FSx. What needs improvement? There are no specific areas that need improvement. There aren't any particular features we'd like to see in the next release. Some of the graphical user interface changes in the later versions of NetApp have not been as good as the older ones, like in the 9.5 era. Just from overall usability from our tier three team, we've had to go in and fix some things after they go and do a deployment since there are certain options that used to be there that aren't. What do I think about the stability of the solution? It's been very stable. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? For our uses, it's been fairly scalable. How are customer service and support? Technical support has been great. We had to reach out to NetApp before when we had an issue or a hardware problem. They were helpful. How would you rate customer service and support? Positive Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch? Before using AFF, we had some of the older FAS 8040 systems. We still have a couple in operation and some from way back in 7-Mode still on our current cluster. We have been a NetApp shop for a while and just wanted to continue working with them. How was the initial setup? The initial setup was straightforward. What about the implementation team? We did have a partner work with us to kind of get it up and running so that was a big help. Our experience with them was very good. What was our ROI? While I don't have the numbers to quantify it, I have seen an ROI. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? The pricing seems reasonable. What other advice do I have? We started to look to use BlueXP for managing our FSXN instances. We will be using it to help migrate from an on-prem to a cloud environment. We are starting to migrate some of our workloads as we work on closing one of our data centers. So, we'll probably be using that for migration purposes. I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2022-12-06T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by reviewer2026638 from Excellent ONTAP cluster, scale-out, and architecture What is our primary use case? We use the solution mostly for virtual workloads, VMware, databases, and also the VDI infrastructure. How has it helped my organization? We can provide all the SLA performance-wise and high availability to the business. We are trying to maintain compliance with all business SLAs. What is most valuable? The ONTAP cluster, the scale-out, and the architecture are great. We are a large-scale company, and our growth has been pretty significant over the last five or six years. We like the scale, and the way NetApp grows, so that's why we use it. It's mostly for block storage. NetApp data helped to reduce our operational latency to some extent. We've saved maybe 20%. We have not been affected by ransomware since using the solution. What needs improvement? The NetApp support could be better. NetApp can improve a lot on hardware upgrades and proactive support. In the past, AFF has helped optimize our costs. However, not anymore since NetApp has increased its prices. The optimization we had previously is not the case anymore. Recently, we have had some support issues that we definitely have some concerns with. For how long have I used the solution? I've been using the solution for eight to ten years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? The stability is good. I'd rate it eight out of ten. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? The solution is scalable. We are in a large enterprise, so that fits our requirements. There is about 30 to 35 petabytes of data and a block size of close to 25 to 30 petabytes of data. How are customer service and support? Technical support could be better and should be more proactive. We've also had some production outages. Due to one upgrade, for example, there was a significant outage. How would you rate customer service and support? Neutral Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch? I'm also familiar with Dell EMC. We've used PowerMax, and we have used StorageGRID. We use AFF as this is the main environment for our corporate environment. NetApp has been in the environment for quite some time, so we have built that comfort level with the product. How was the initial setup? I was involved with the initial deployment of the solution. The setup was complex on our end. Our internal processes are difficult as we have such an extensive environment. For example, we must go to security and do all the reviews and assessments. It's our internal program. There's nothing on NetApp. What about the implementation team? We worked directly with a third party on the deployment and with NetApp. Overall, the experience was okay. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? The pricing has definitely increased significantly as compared to other competitors. What other advice do I have? I have not used NetApp BlueXP. We are looking into FSx ONTAP. We are trying to do the pilot program on FSx ONTAP, and we will probably use that in the cloud in AWS. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. We've only really had some support issues and some issues around performance sometimes. Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2022-12-06T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by reviewer2042487 from Is reliable and scalable, and can quickly and efficiently snapshot the data What is our primary use case? Our primary use case is running NFS exports for our local on-premises VMware and our CIFS for local shares. What is most valuable? I like the ability to snapshot, and the cloning features are valuable to us as well. I like that I can quickly and efficiently snapshot the data and move it to wherever I need to locally or in the cloud. Also, I know that when I take the snapshot that all of the data will be there and that it will be usable when I need to use it. The reliability of NetAPP AFF is another valuable feature. Blue XP has made it a single pane of glass so that we can see both on-premises and the cloud. We don't have to worry about going back and forth. It has made everything seamless in terms of the look and feel for the admins. We use other NetApp Cloud Services solutions such as FSx, Cloud Volumes ONTAP, BlueXP, and Cloud Manager. We're just starting to dip our toes into FSxN. We run all of our student services, our general ledger, and all of our classroom-related items off of CVOs. It has been very reliable for us. For how long have I used the solution? We've been using NetApp AFF since 2019. What do I think about the stability of the solution? We have been running NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) since 2019, and we've not had one unplanned outage since then. It's been a reliable workhorse for us. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? We've had to upgrade our available storage three times, and it was all seamless. There is a cost every time, but there hasn't been an outage. It's been quick and seamless, and we haven't had any issues with scalability. We have 8,000 undergraduate students and 2,000 graduate students, and we facilitate another 5,000 university staff. We run all of our campus-wide phone systems and CIFS on it, along with our local VMware environment. We have about 10,000 to 15,000 people relying on NetApp AFF every day. How are customer service and support? Whenever we have a problem, the technical support staff usually contact us before we contact them. We've never had an issue with technical support, so I'd give them a rating of ten out of ten. How would you rate customer service and support? Positive What was our ROI? As far as a return on investment, it's freed up a lot of our time so that we do not have to worry about the little things that usually take up the majority of our day. Our time can be spent in other areas, whether that's helping with other products, developing new ones, or helping end users. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? It can get a little expensive if you need to add more disks. The cost is a pain point for us, especially in terms of expansion. What other advice do I have? Overall, I would rate NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) at ten on a scale from one to ten. Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2022-12-06T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by Christopher Dover from Expandable, transparent, and reduces operational latency What is our primary use case? We primarily use the solution for service deck storage. What is most valuable? Scalability is the most valuable feature. The ones that I use are hot spot-able. If we need more, we can just throw in another drive. I like the fact that if my drive goes bad it doesn't crash automatically and the system will try to auto-save that data by moving it to one of the hot spots. Then we can just pull out that drive and throw our brand new one in and we'll remove it from the 2020 or 2040s. We went from 600 GBs to 1.2 TBs. We have plenty of storage. I like how easy it is to discover an issue and either resolve that issue or fine-tune that app to premium support to find that resolution. We've reduced operational latency. We use the 40 GB connection. In terms of latency between our storage and the VMs that we use, latency is almost nonexistent since we have the server and FAS so close together. We use a 40 GB fiber-optic connection on the back. We don't see any latency at all. We've reduced it to less than 5%. While you can never reduce it to zero, it's barely noticeable at this point. What needs improvement? There are no big areas needed for improvement. Whenever we use it, I've never had a problem that couldn't be fixed with just a phone call. I've never really had any absolute dead zones on it. I can't think of a way to make it better than it already is. The size of NetApp could be better. They're always about 40 pounds without the hard drives in them, so it would be great if there's a way to make them smaller yet keep the functionality. That would reduce the physical footprint. For how long have I used the solution? I've been using the solution since 2012. What do I think about the stability of the solution? I haven't really come across any stability problems. It's pretty stable. It's fantastic. Data recovery is awesome. If we ever have any issue with having to recover any data on there due to the system and the way we have it set up, we can have it back within an hour. That's thanks to our backup system and the connectivity that we have between NetApp and our backup. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? We're using one with between 30 and 35 virtual servers. However, we have those together with 14 other stacks of the same size. How are customer service and support? I like the fact that they're very hands-on in finding that resolution for us. We've faced a lot of problems since we break the system on purpose just to make sure that when we go out to the fields and use it, if we have the same problem, we know how to fix it. Technical support is excellent. We've never had a problem with them, and they always came back to us with an answer. Within 24 hours, we have our fix. How would you rate customer service and support? Positive Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch? We have always used NetApp. We did not previously use a different solution. How was the initial setup? I've never deployed the solution. I've just worked with it directly. What was our ROI? The best benefit I've seen using it was the data distribution between two different FASs for data backups. It should be fast, and it's super reliable. It's easy to do, and it's an almost hands-off way of setting up. That's where the ROI is for us. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? I've never worked with pricing. I can't speak to the exact costs. Which other solutions did I evaluate? We thought about using Dell, however, when it came to cost-effectiveness, we stayed with NetApp. I like the way NetApp is coded and its maintenance configuration. I know how to set up a NetApp; I prefer that over Dell. What other advice do I have? AFF hasn't necessarily helped us to optimize FAS as we've always used it, and it's never been detrimental for us to use it. I have not been affected by ransomware since deploying AFF. I wouldn't say that is due to any extra attention. The environments that I use it on, we're behind several mitigations for that. We do not use any other NetApp services at this time. I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2022-12-06T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by reviewer2042493 from Is easy to use and flexible, and provides the best speed for our applications What is our primary use case? We use it to create our volume groups for our ESX hosts, VMware, file storage, and Flash Pool for our images. We use it as a tier storage to our NetApp storage grid. What is most valuable? Snapshots, snap clones, backups, flexibility, and agility are valuable features. I like that NetApp AFF is easy to use. We can automate everything for our backups and use cases. It's fast and simple, and provides storage to all of our VMware ESX hosts. It expands easily as well. Our latency is fine, and NetApp AFF provides us the best speed for our applications. In terms of optimization of costs, NetApp AFF is a little expensive, but I don't mind paying for it. The ability to connect to CVO and ANF is great, and as a result, it has a lot of flexibility. For how long have I used the solution? I've been using NetApp AFF since 2016. What do I think about the stability of the solution? We haven't had any major problems with stability. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? It scales well, and we haven't had any problems. We also have site storage with AFF C190, and being able to integrate with our other sites has been great. We have about 16 clusters in two different data centers for AFF. How are customer service and support? My experience with technical support has been good. We have a primary TAM and pay for that service. They are very good at responding to our requests and needs, and I'd give them a ten out of ten. How would you rate customer service and support? Positive Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch? We were on spinning disks with NetApp before, but we also had IBM XID. We switched to NetApp AFF because we were already heavy users of NetApp. We liked the cost, flexibility, and the ability to adapt to all of our workloads. Now, we're a single storage provider or user. What was our ROI? Our ROI is that we've been able to reduce our storage footprint by 30% by going to a single storage provider. We can FlexVol our environment. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? I think the pricing and licensing are a little high, but compared to those of other storage vendors, it's within reason. After the three-year prepay, the extended warranty is a little expensive. Which other solutions did I evaluate? We evaluated IBM and Dell EMC, and Dell EMC was too expensive, and it didn't have the flexibility that NetApp had. What other advice do I have? On a scale from one to ten, I would rate NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) at ten. Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2022-12-06T00:00:00-05:00