Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs Hitachi Content Platform comparison

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Hitachi Vantara are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. Amazon Web Services (AWS) is ranked #10 with an average rating of 8.0, while Hitachi Vantara is ranked #15 with an average rating of 8.0. Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds a 0.8% mindshare in FaOS, compared to Hitachi Vantara’s 1.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of Hitachi Vantara users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Amazon EFS and Hitachi Content Platform are competing storage solutions in the cloud infrastructure category. Amazon EFS has the upper hand with its attractive pricing and customer support, while Hitachi Content Platform offers superior features justifying its cost.

Features: Amazon EFS offers scalable storage solutions with automatic scaling based on demand, ensuring ease of integration with EC2 instances. Its elasticity and flexible pricing are significant advantages. It provides a stable, fast NFS file storage, easily mountable with no size limitations for packages. Hitachi Content Platform features extensive data management, including immutability, compliance features, and data protection elements. It supports deduplication, encryption, version controlling, and efficient management of metadata and bit-rot prevention.

Room for Improvement: Amazon EFS could enhance its user interface and streamline system design for a more straightforward configuration process. While the integration with AWS services is robust, expanding compatibility with non-AWS services could be beneficial. Improving customization options for varied deployment scenarios would be advantageous. Hitachi Content Platform could improve ease of integration for less technical environments and reduce setup complexity. Reducing dependence on additional licenses for local cloud storage capabilities would add value. Enhancing the GUI for smoother user experience and reducing the web address complexity used in accessing stored data could also improve its usability.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Amazon EFS offers seamless deployment within AWS infrastructures, paired with comprehensive customer support services, facilitating smooth operation. Hitachi Content Platform requires a more complex setup due to its customizable nature but compensates with dedicated support for navigating intricate configurations and maintaining complex environments.

Pricing and ROI: Amazon EFS utilizes a pay-as-you-go billing model, minimizing upfront costs and promising potential for high ROI due to its scalability. Specific pricing details include billing based on storage used. In contrast, Hitachi Content Platform demands higher initial investment but offers superior long-term ROI potential because of its comprehensive feature offerings, which cater particularly well to enterprises with intricate data needs.

To learn more, read our detailed Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Hitachi Content Platform Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Hitachi Content Platform

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 861,490 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Pure Storage FlashBlade

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.8%, down from 6.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is 0.8%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Hitachi Content Platform is 1.7%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage

Featured Reviews

Eric Black

Solutions Architect at Recovery Point Systems

The ability to leverage multi-tenancy along with immutability is a huge benefit for us

The only thing I feel FlashBlade is missing is the SOS API. If it had SOS API, that would put it well over the top. Veeam Backup specifically has started to streamline their API, and they are doing that with SOS API. They have optimized it. Any of the S3 devices out there that support this SOS API can have far more API calls at once. On our side, that translates to better restoration. With SOS API, it can leverage far more restorations at a single given time or read from the device in simple terms. That results in maximizing the output and throughput from the device itself.

Read full review

MuhammadAzhar Khan

Senior DevOps Engineer at Alibaba Group

Auto-scaling capabilities enhance file management while reducing downtime

The most valuable feature of Amazon EFS is its auto-scaling capability. It's really easy to configure EFS by just creating it and running a command to directly configure it with my servers. It supports unlimited use, and charges are applied based on the file usage at the end of the month. The solution offers reduced downtime and increased durability through its auto-scaling features.

Read full review

Mir Gulzar Ahmed

IT Manager at Synergy Computers

Integrates well with existing systems but technical support for the platform needs improvement

While deployment is simple, it's not as simple as StorageGRID. The architecture is entirely different, even though the end product uses the same protocols. The user interface isn't as user-friendly, and the management platform UI isn't as intuitive as others. Deployment isn't as centralized either. Although I've deployed Hitachi Content myself in our production head office for the VM team, even though it's simple, it wasn't completely straightforward. They still required my help with the initial configuration environment setup. So, it's not just simple; there are some tricky aspects. The environment is tricky, but if you understand it, configuration can be done quickly.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"It uses the same platform for connectivity so integration is seamless."

"What I like best about Pure Storage FlashBlade is its object storage functionality, plus it has fast underlying hardware. Pure Storage FlashBlade is also very stable. I find its stability one of its valuable features."

"Among its most appealing features are its ease of handling and minimal maintenance requirements."

"I would rate Pure Storage FlashBlade a ten out of ten."

"The solution provides many controllers."

"It helps simplify our storage, because the user interface is very simple and the installation is easy."

"The ease of deployment and management has helped us simplify our storage. We also do not have to worry about capacity management as much. A lot of these things are native to Pure Storage."

"The product is scalable and easy to expand."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"We are not that big of a cloud user. We just use it for the storage of our bytes. The most valuable aspect is the storage."

"We haven't seen any downtime or challenges when using the services."

"The first valuable thing is it is scalable."

"Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is secure as it is used under VPC."

"The product's initial setup phase is easy, as per the configurations."

"The initial setup was straightforward."

"Elastic File Systems allow me to share data, provision, and manage capacity and performance in AWS."

"Its elasticity and flexible pricing are the most valuable. For Amazon EFS, you are charged based on the storage. It is also very fast and stable with a very simple and intuitive interface."

More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) pros

"Hitachi is a big company, so it's a very strong product."

"The Hitachi Content Platform is a stable and reliable solution."

"The main selling point is its compatibility with different environments. It functions like an on-prem Google Drive or Dropbox built on top of the object storage."

"As an architect, I like the management features that come with Hitachi Content Platform because it makes things easy."

"Companies can scale the solution."

"The platform helps in efficient data management with the ease of server provisioning."

"The way that they handle the DR is very good because when there is a failover, it is seamless to the users."

"Integrating Hitachi Content Platform with existing systems is not challenging."

Cons

"Pure Storage FlashBlade should improve on more cloud integration."

"The documentational aspect of FlashBlade needs improvement."

"To improve FlashBlade, some analysts suggest enhancing its handling of relational database management systems and SQL queries."

"The solution is expensive."

"I would like to see more VM-Aware features in the next release of this solution."

"There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."

"I would like to see more monitoring capability included in the next release of this solution."

"I want efficiency. FlashBlade doesn't have efficiency now."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"The lack of transparency in the costs attached to the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."

"The user activity needs to be more connected."

"Around 80 percent of the features of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) are available on Linux and not in Windows, making it a major drawback of the product."

"Its deployment process could be faster while installing the Python package directly into the environment."

"The platform's connectivity could be improved to be more comparable to S3 buckets, which offer better API availability."

"It should be simplified. There are people who don't have cloud experience. It should be storage that we are able to just connect to."

"Amazon EFS is more costly compared to other storage options available from AWS."

"The product's stability has some shortcomings where improvements are required."

More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) cons

"When you want to replace a disk, we need to start the maintenance from the S nodes. We have to automate maintenance so any onsite engineer can replace it after that, but we don't need to do this on VSP platforms. An engineer can come in and replace that specific disk. If also we could do that on Hitachi Content Platform, it would be great for us."

"This product's ability to track logs for access still needs to be improved."

"In terms of the customer support, I can say it's a mixed reaction depending on the country."

"There is room for improvement in the capacity for integration with other platforms."

"Although they claim to provide NFS, the actual implementation requires an additional gateway, which makes it a costly solution."

"They should improve the user interface. It's a little bit complex. It does not have a self-learning method. You need to know how to use it before you touch the system. The user interface is not self-explanatory."

"The user interface isn't as user-friendly, and the management platform UI isn't as intuitive as others. So it can be more user-friendly."

"The only thing is that it should be more cost effective."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price could be cheaper."

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

"Support is a separate line item. Support is a different cost, but whatever your support is now, that's what you're going to pay forever. If your support's $100 today, six years from now it's $100. It doesn't fluctuate unless you upgrade it, or change it, etc."

"The pricing is relatively expensive due to the FlashBlade technology. However, for companies needing quick and reliable data access, the cost is justified."

"I rate the tool's pricing a seven to eight out of ten."

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

"In my opinion, we have paid the right price for the product. I don't think that it is too much or too little."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"The main challenge with EFS is its cost, which is slightly higher compared to EBS or S3. For one GB or ten GB of data, S3 is much cheaper. EFS could cost around $30 to $50 per month for similar usage."

"Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) offers a pay-as-you-go model, so whenever you use its services, you need to pay."

"I would rate the pricing 7 out of 10."

"The product's price depends on the services and the size and capacity at which it is used in a business environment."

"The solution's price is mid-ranged."

"It has flexible pricing. You are charged based on your storage."

"The product charges are based on the amount of data stored."

"The product’s cost is average."

"Pricing is comparable to other solutions in the market."

"The price of the Hitachi Content Platform is very high."

"I think the ROI for this solution is very good because the pricing for it is in between other solutions."

"Overall, it's costly."

"Hitachi is more expensive than StorageGRID."

"The pricing could be better."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

861,490 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Educational Organization

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Educational Organization

Computer Software Company

22%

Financial Services Firm

22%

Government

13%

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Pure Storage FlashBlade?

The tool's most valuable feature is its fast performance, especially in handling snapshots. It helps during power out...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashBlade?

The pricing of Pure Storage FlashBlade is expensive compared to other products I used from other companies in the pas...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?

I believe there is not much improvement needed because they have everything we need, but the interface is a little bi...

See all answers

Which file storage system is better - Amazon EFS (elastic file storage) or Azure File Storage?

Amazon EFS is easy to set up: you can use the AWS management console, API, or command-line. Amazon EFS can grow to pe...

See all answers

What do you like most about Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)?

The product's initial setup phase is easy, as per the configurations.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)?

Amazon EFS is more costly compared to other storage options available from AWS.

See all answers

What do you like most about Hitachi Content Platform?

Integrating Hitachi Content Platform with existing systems is not challenging.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Hitachi Content Platform?

In comparison to competitors like Huawei, which can use all storage protocols in the same platform, Hitachi Content P...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Hitachi Content Platform?

Mainly, from my project, Hitachi Content Platform is used for archiving. The customer is in banking, so they need to ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 20% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 11% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 11% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

Microsoft Azure File Storage vs Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)

Compared 56% of the time

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP vs Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)

Compared 9% of the time

Google Cloud Storage vs Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)

Compared 8% of the time

Amazon S3 Glacier vs Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)

Compared 6% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)

Compared 6% of the time

More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Competitors

MinIO vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 27% of the time

Dell ECS vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 20% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 20% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 12% of the time

Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 5% of the time

More Hitachi Content Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

June 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)

July 2025

Download Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) product report

Buyer's Guide

Hitachi Content Platform

July 2025

Download Hitachi Content Platform product report

Also Known As

No data available

HCP, Hitachi Vantara Content Platform, Hitachi Vantara HCP

Overview

FlashBlade is the industry’s most advanced scale-out storage for unstructured data, powered by a modern, massively parallel architecture to consolidate complex data silos (like backup appliances and data lakes) and accelerate tomorrow’s discoveries and insights.

Pure Storage

Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) provides simple, scalable file storage for use with Amazon EC2 instances in the AWS Cloud. Amazon EFS is easy to use and offers a simple interface that allows you to create and configure file systems quickly and easily. With Amazon EFS, storage capacity is elastic, growing and shrinking automatically as you add and remove files, so your applications have the storage they need, when they need it.

When mounted to Amazon EC2 instances, an Amazon EFS file system provides a standard file system interface and file system access semantics, allowing you to seamlessly integrate Amazon EFS with your existing applications and tools. Multiple Amazon EC2 instances can access an Amazon EFS file system at the same time, allowing Amazon EFS to provide a common data source for workloads and applications running on more than one Amazon EC2 instance.

It’s designed for high availability and durability, and provides performance for a broad spectrum of workloads and applications, including Big Data and analytics, media processing workflows, content management, web serving, and home directories.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Hitachi Content Platform is an object storage solution that enables IT organizations and cloud service providers to store, share, sync, protect, preserve, analyze and retrieve file data from a single system. It is more efficient, easier to use, and capable of handling much more data than traditional file storage solutions. HCP automates day-to-day IT operations like data protection and readily evolves to changes in scale, scope, applications, storage, server and cloud technologies over the life of data. In IT environements where data grows quickly or must live for years, decades or even indefinitely, these capabilities are invaluable.

Hitachi Vantara

Sample Customers

ServiceNow, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Motorsport, Dominos, Man AHL

Arcesium, Atlassian, Seeking Alpha, Zend

Rabobank, Xinhua News Agency, Kremsm'ller Industrieanlagenbau KG, KSC Commercial Internet, AIS Group, Shanghai Interactive Television Co. Ltd (SiTV), China Telecom, Spin Master

Buyer's Guide

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Hitachi Content Platform

June 2025

Free Report: Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Hitachi Content Platform

Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Hitachi Content Platform and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

861,490 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Hitachi Content Platform report.

See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.

We monitor all File and Object Storage reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.