A bunch of what you are looking for can be found on the following page Pure Storage vs. NetApp: Comparison | NetApp
That is due for a refresh in light of some new releases and announcements over the last six to eight months, but it is a good place to start.
If you're looking at an X50 or an X70, then the chances are that your customer is also looking at a SAN only array with at least 120TB of raw capacity. If so you should probably look at an ASA-C400 or ASA-C800 as one of your options that you propose to your customer.
If you haven't already, go and do a quick comparison over at NetApp TCO Calculator for both an ASA-C250 and the ASA-A800 and you'll see the 3 year TCO for 120 TB raw is less than half that of the equivalent //X50 or //X70. If your customer really needs sub-500 microsecond response times performance (which Pure will struggle to achieve), then look at the ASA-A800 TCO vs both of these platforms. In terms of published performance figures, the A800 leaves both the //X50 and //X70 in its dust.
Once you've shown that the price performance advantage for NetApp is compelling, you can then show them NetApp's superiority in
- Sustainability and power consumption
- Cloud integration
- Data Protection
- Cyber-resilience
- Multi-Layer encryption
- Scale-out
- Predictive Monitoring
- End-to-end NVMe
- Availability
- Cloud Tiering
- Capacity and Efficiency Guarantees
- RAW -> Effective capacity ratios
- Snapshot managment
- Application Integration
- etc etc etc
you will need to be a current NetApp partner to access tco.netapp.com, also if you're a NetApp partner, you can access the internal comparison guides on fieldportal.netapp.com. If you don't, then feel free to reach out to your nearest NetApp partner who can help to guide you through the process.
