Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs Quantum ActiveScale comparison

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Quantum are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. Amazon Web Services (AWS) is ranked #10 with an average rating of 7.8, while Quantum is ranked #24. Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds a 0.9% mindshare in FaOS, compared to Quantum’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Quantum users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Amazon EFS and Quantum ActiveScale compete in the cloud and object storage markets. Amazon EFS has an advantage in pricing and customer support, while Quantum ActiveScale offers advanced features that justify a higher price tag.

Features: Amazon EFS supports scalability, elasticity, and integration within the AWS ecosystem, suitable for flexible storage applications. Quantum ActiveScale offers data durability, comprehensive security features, and robust data management capabilities, focusing on protection and management.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Amazon EFS provides straightforward deployment within AWS services, leveraging AWS’s support network. Quantum ActiveScale involves complex on-premise setup with specialized support dedicated to its deployment, ensuring a tailored service experience.

Pricing and ROI: Amazon EFS features a cost-effective, pay-as-you-go model, beneficial for variable workloads and quick ROI. Quantum ActiveScale, with higher upfront costs, promises strong ROI through improved data management efficiencies over time.

To learn more, read our detailed Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Quantum ActiveScale Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Quantum ActiveScale

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,484 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 August 2025, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.8%, down from 6.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is 0.9%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Quantum ActiveScale is 0.5%, down from 0.5% 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

Frank Lai

Architecture Department at Supermicro Computer

Good performance and reliable but the setup is complex

We would like to see a self-sufficient installation. Nowadays it's open-source, but the installation is still tied to the vendor, which means it is unlikely that it is going to scale. I want them to tap into the broader community. It is really emerging, they have a year over year, 50% annual growth. With a 10-year-old company, it will certainly bring a lot of interest, and will certainly make it more successful, if they tap into that growing customer base. They have to make themselves relevant to the industry. The industry is totally geared to the Cloud, DevOps, and geared for agility. The software with the appliance in my set is already outdated, and it is not that it cannot sell, but it has to be tapping into the emerging and growing sectors to continue with the customers and businesses. This is what the requirement is, to improve their technology. Which means that they have to make themselves relevant to the industry.

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 has absolutely simplified our storage because the dashboards on the consoles show a clear understanding of where you are, and it is also very easy to provision. This been a big help for our teams."

"We have integrated it with VMware. The integration process is pretty good. Especially with VMware, it helps with the capacity of it."

"The most valuable features include the ease of implementation, ease of use and the speed that you can do backup and recovery on."

"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."

"The most valuable feature is Safe Mode."

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

"The most valuable features are the Metro clustering, and disaster recovery."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"The initial setup was straightforward."

"The solution is scalable."

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

"The platform is highly scalable."

"Amazon EFS is extremely stable, as it is managed by AWS."

"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."

More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) pros

"The technology is stable which is good."

"Workflow is easy to manage and maintain."

Cons

"There could be improvements in public cloud integration."

"We initially encountered challenges with the assembly process due to issues with the documentation required during setup, an area where Pure Storage needs improvement."

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

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

"Recently, while upgrading the version code, one of the controllers failed. Replacing the controller took between 14 to 20 days."

"Commvault has mainly driven the Analytics, providing data and reports. However, the product has room for improvement, especially regarding storage analytics. Upgrading firmware has caused issues, requiring feature disabling to revert to traditional backups. The firmware upgrades sometimes affect Commvault backups."

"I would like to see better integration."

"In the realm of micro-services, I think that Pure Storage can do well if they start getting in there and making their arrays more micro-services ready."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"The deployment is definitely not an easy process."

"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."

"The main challenge with EFS is its cost, which is slightly higher compared to EBS or S3."

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

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

"Their response was not prompt, and it took them a while to figure out solutions. While the time to respond was good, the time to resolve was not optimal, as it took more than a week."

"Elastic File Systems can be expensive due to the nature of data transfer costs, using services like SSTP, and potentially being costly in a rate-shift context."

"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."

More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) cons

"We would like to see a self-sufficient installation."

"Lacks some ability to integrate with different systems."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our licensing is renewed annually."

"The price of this solution could be made more affordable."

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

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

"It's a costly solution, but Pure Storage FlashBlade doesn't require additional licenses. All of the software is combined into one bundle."

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

"Pure Storage FlashBlade is a hardware appliance, and it's very expensive if you compare its price with other solutions. You can get the same features and benefits from its competitor, VAST Data, but for half the price of Pure Storage FlashBlade."

"I have seen ROI. It has allowed me to increase the density of my VMs without having to purchase anything additional."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

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

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

"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."

"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."

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

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

"Quantum ActiveScale is open-source."

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

865,484 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Healthcare Company

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

13%

University

Educational Organization

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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)?

We don't need to purchase it; we are just using it and paying Amazon as per the utilization. We make direct payments ...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 19% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 9% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

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

Compared 67% of the time

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

Compared 7% of the time

Google Cloud Storage vs Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)

Compared 6% of the time

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

Compared 5% of the time

Amazon S3 Glacier vs Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)

Compared 5% of the time

More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Competitors

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Quantum ActiveScale

Compared 43% of the time

Dell ECS vs Quantum ActiveScale

Compared 30% of the time

Qumulo vs Quantum ActiveScale

Compared 26% of the time

More Quantum ActiveScale Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

August 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)

August 2025

Download Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) product report

Buyer's Guide

File and Object Storage

August 2025

Download Quantum ActiveScale product report

Also Known As

No data available

ActiveScale, Quantum ActiveScale Object Storage, ActiveScale Object Storage

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)

StorNext File System
Increase productivity and reduce time to critical business insights with StorNext® File System. StorNext architecture delivers the necessary performance to get your business moving forward.

Quantum

Sample Customers

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

Arcesium, Atlassian, Seeking Alpha, Zend

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Quantum ActiveScale

July 2025

Free Report: Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Quantum ActiveScale

Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Quantum ActiveScale and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,484 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Quantum ActiveScale 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.