Feeds

Pure Storage's latest arrays cost DOUBLE what it claimed earlier

Hey, who wants a top-spec 250TB FA-450? I dunno, you got $900K?

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

Our Pure Storage range expansion story about the firm's FlashArray 400 series arrays prompted a missive from Pure saying that we'd got the price wrong. Which is strange given that we were quoting Pure's own figures.

According to Pure Storage's marketing bods, low-end model pricing for the FA-405 and FA-450 arrays was $6 to $8/GB and not $3 to $4/GB, which we originally reported last week – headline: "Hey, who wants a 40TB all-flash Pure box? I dunno, you got $160k?"

Using the $3 to $4/GB range, as featured in Pure's press release, we calculated the entry-level FA-405 would cost roughly $120,000 to $160,000 for a fully configured, 40TB usable, machine.

Pure said the FA-405 started at a price significantly less than $100,000. Marketeer Max Kixmoeller told The Register:

  • Pure doesn't set end-user "street" pricing since we sell through the channel (this would be illegal)...but we can give you estimates of what end-user pricing is at typical discounts and channel mark-ups. These will vary though by country, reseller, and volume of product purchased. Hence we tend to talk about ranges vs. absolute numbers.
  • Pure markets end-user pricing "starting at $3-$4/GB". This is for our larger systems, as the larger systems amortise the cost of the controllers over a large amount of flash. The more flash you add to a system, the lower the $/GB gets. Smaller systems have a higher $/GB as a result of this, typically in the $6-8/GB range.
  • So, to give you some examples:
    • Our new highest-end system is the FA-450, fully-configured with 250TBs usable, and that goes for $800 to 900K. $900K/250TB = $3.6/GB. Higher discounts would make it less expensive.
    • Our lowest-end system is the FA-405, configured with 10TB usable, which goes for $80-100K. At $80K, that would be $8/GB usable.
    • All the "usable" numbers above include all overhead (RAID, HA, FlashCare Reserve), and add the value of data reduction at typical rates.
  • Customers who buy large systems tend to be more focused on $/GB as the metric they look at, hence the $3-4/GB marketing range we use. Smaller customers tend to be focused on total acquisition cost, hence we say "Systems available for less than $100K”.

By extrapolation, a 40TB FA-405 at $8/GB would cost $360,000 and, at a $6/GB cost, would sting you for $240,000. Not cheap. ®

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

More from The Register

next story
Linux? Bah! Red Hat has its eye on the CLOUD – and it wants to own it
CEO says it will be 'undisputed leader' in enterprise cloud tech
Oracle SHELLSHOCKER - data titan lists unpatchables
Database kingpin lists 32 products that can't be patched (yet) as GNU fixes second vuln
Ello? ello? ello?: Facebook challenger in DDoS KNOCKOUT
Gets back up again after half an hour though
Hey, what's a STORAGE company doing working on Internet-of-Cars?
Boo - it's not a terabyte car, it's just predictive maintenance and that
Troll hunter Rackspace turns Rotatable's bizarro patent to stone
News of the Weird: Screen-rotating technology declared unpatentable
prev story

Whitepapers

A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
Storage capacity and performance optimization at Mizuno USA
Mizuno USA turn to Tegile storage technology to solve both their SAN and backup issues.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Beginner's guide to SSL certificates
De-mystify the technology involved and give you the information you need to make the best decision when considering your online security options.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.