We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

What are the advantages of all-flash storage over other types of storage?


What are some major benefits of all-flash storage arrays? Why should companies invest in all-flash as opposed to a different storage solution? 

ITCS user
914 Answers

author avatar
Top 5LeaderboardReal User

It has better performance than Hybrid storage and customers can have more IOPS,
for the mission critical application customers better use all-flash arrayas

author avatar
Top 5Real User

The selection of All-Flash Storage Solutions depends on requirements and the goal any customer is looking to achieve at the end.

All-Flash is not a fit for all requirements......

"If a customer needs a storage solution with high to extreme performance,
efficient, power and cooling efficient (environmentally friendly),
build-in compression; then they should choose All-Flash solutions."

It is not all about the performance that storage manufacturers are very aggressive to sell their All-Flash boxes.

Just think about SAS disks..... those were used as performance and SATA as capacity.

Enterprise SAS disk technology is limited to 1.8TB/disk only; that is why storage manufacturers are promoting their All-Flash to fill the capacity gap created because of SAS disks technology limitations.

The modern Flash disks are covering both requirements (Capacity+Performance) but are still expensive (if we assume the same RAW capacity).

If a customer comes with the requirements that fits to an Enterprise Hybrid Storage solution like 40%SSD, 30%SAS and 30%SATA; 400TB RAW in total, then they should select All-Flash instead, as both solutions will not have any significant cost differences.

If a customer's requirements (Performance+Capacity+Cost-effective) fits to SAS then they should choose a SAS based storage solution.

If a customer needs an archival storage then they should choose SATA based solutions.

If a customer needs a storage solution with high to extreme performance, Rack-space, power and cooling efficient (environmentally friendly), build-in compression, then they should choose All-Flash solutions.

If customer needs less SSDs/Flash disks; like.... 10%SSD+45%SAS+45%SATA, then Hybrid type of storage solutions will be a good and cost-effective option.

author avatar
Top 5Real User

Speed (IOPs), increased reliability, compactness.

If your application does not needs those you can go with legacy solutions as far as price justifies.

Sooner or later even price will be in favour of all-flash

author avatarRony_Sklar
Community Manager

Thanks for your input @EGonzalez. What types of storage solutions would you suggest if all-flash is too expensive?

author avatarKrishnamohan Velpuri

We can use Cache tiers with flash disks in part storage pool creation. So that we can get better performance may be not reaches All-flash but better than SAS drives

author avatarRony_Sklar
Community Manager

@Krishnamohan Velpuri Thanks for your input :)

author avatar
Top 5LeaderboardReal User

In general, all-flash arrays have much better price/performance (in case if turning on DECO is not slowing down the array - some vendors have this issue, so PoC is needed) than hdd-only or hybrid arrays. Higher performance, lower power consumption per TB. The support cost for the HDD-only and hybrid arrays will be more an more expensive, as the HDDs share is going lower, and the main R&D is moved to all-flash arrays. Of course, in some cases (i.e. video surveillance, D2D and maybe several others), HDD-only arrays are the better option, so it's better to make a decision case-by-case.

author avatar
Top 5Real User

The best benefit what I think is the step towards "Green-IT", as All-Flash has less weight, consumes low power, needs less conditioning/cooling and you can get more performance in a small foot-print (saves rack space).

It's still on the expensive side (referring to SAS-based storage solutions) in terms of /GB cost but All-flash storage or high-performance storage solutions help to reduce Servers' computing cost or increase Systems' overall performance and efficiency.

In most of the cases/solutions, you can safely reduce CPU core count requirements as low to 50%  at computing/server-side if you had selected All-Flash at the data-storage side, so you can make it cost-effective.

author avatar
Top 20Real User

It all depends on the budget as well.

If required High IOPs for Database or read/write intensive services (and also budget is not an issue) then go for All Flash...

Otherwise, combining SSD with NL-SAS alongwith tiering / cache features will suffice purpose in most conditions...

author avatar

All-flash arrays are more costlier than any other storage arrays.
Will give more performance with less latency when compared to any other arrays

author avatarRony_Sklar
Community Manager

@Krishnamohan Velpuri Do the benefits of performance with less latency justify the cost of all-flash?

author avatarKrishnamohan Velpuri

@Rony_Sklar Of course, its costly. If performance required.
More money = more performance  as of now. May be in future we may get for less price.
It depends, if customer can bare and if they defiantly need less latency for there applications.

author avatar
Real User

Today's heavy workload demands significant performance from storage and to fulfill the requirement all-flash storage is the best fit. 

Also, the user gets the benefit in terms of capacity enhancement from compression, deduplication without comprising on performance.

author avatar
Top 10LeaderboardReal User

All flash disks are now democratized. They are no longer very expensive. For a huge production they are better in every way. Better perf, better reliability. In the past we use to change mecanic disk every day, now we are surprised when we ask support to change one. Of course the choice depend of the goal but if we could only have flash storage it would be perfect :) 

Find out what your peers are saying about Pure Storage, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Dell EMC and others in All-Flash Storage Arrays. Updated: November 2021.
554,586 professionals have used our research since 2012.