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

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Red Hat 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 Red Hat is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.9. Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds a 0.8% mindshare in FaOS, compared to Red Hat’s 18.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 82% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Red Hat Ceph Storage and Amazon EFS are competing products in the storage solutions category, each with distinct advantages. Amazon EFS seems to have the upper hand due to its scalability and seamless integration with AWS services.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage offers a unified and scalable storage platform with strong data redundancy, supporting block, object, and file storage with CephFS. Amazon EFS features automatic scaling, shared file storage capabilities across multiple AWS cloud instances, and seamless integration with other AWS services, which enhances its utility within cloud ecosystems.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage could improve in its complexity, requiring specialized technical knowledge for setup and management. It also relies partially on third-party support. Amazon EFS might be improved by lowering initial cloud service costs and enhancing its native support options.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Amazon EFS offers simplicity in deployment with a cloud-native structure for rapid scaling and easy integration within AWS. It benefits from AWS's robust customer support. Red Hat Ceph Storage provides deployment flexibility for on-premise solutions but demands more technical expertise to manage effectively, with strong customer service often depending on third-party support.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage has lower setup costs and offers favorable ROI for on-premise environments needing extensive data management, with controllable long-term expenses. Amazon EFS, while having potentially higher initial costs due to cloud service charges, provides value through scalability and minimal maintenance, potentially offering higher ROI due to efficiency and reduced operational load in cloud-oriented infrastructures.

To learn more, read our detailed Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

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

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 856,873 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 June 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 0.8%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 18.5%, down from 22.8% 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

Rifat Rahman

Infrastructure Architect & CEO at Tirzok Private Limited

Offers reliable performance and availability for large deployments

I would like to see improvements in Red Hat Ceph Storage not because I necessarily think it needs improvement, but because I generally prefer to do things manually rather than following the containerization part. Current deployments are based on containers, but I deploy manually with my scripts and controls. If there are no Kubernetes-like requirements, I often prefer to deploy a whole manual process. I don't ask for improvements in the deployment model because Red Hat has its own philosophy about making things, but it's my personal choice that I prefer things manually. Some features are available only in the containerization part, so if those are also available in manual deployment, that will help.

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

"The most valuable feature of this solution is performance."

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

"The initial setup is pretty quick."

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

"The initial setup was straightforward. If you know how to plug in power and network you're pretty much qualified. They were on site to configure the network, the box to fit into our network architecture. Other than that, we self-managed from there."

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

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

"We have seen a reduction in the total cost of ownership by around 20%."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

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

"We can run code and deploy it whenever we want."

"The initial setup was straightforward."

"Amazon EFS offers the flexibility of scaling as needed without requiring pre-provisioned storage."

"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."

"The solution is scalable."

"The first valuable thing is it is scalable."

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

More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) pros

"Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest."

"Without any extra costs, I was able to provide a redundant environment."

"The high availability of the solution is important to us."

"Replicated and erasure coded pools have allowed for multiple copies to be kept, easy scale-out of additional nodes, and easy replacement of failed hard drives. The solution continues working even when there are errors."

"We are using Ceph internal inexpensive disk and data redundancy without spending extra money on external storage."

"Stratus allows more reliability than all the other types of computers available."

"The community support is very good."

"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

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

"It would be nice if you could store file-based in the same box with the same technology."

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

"An area for improvement in Pure Storage FlashBlade is its price. It could be reduced. The technical support for Pure Storage FlashBlade also needs improvement. It used to be good, with more experienced engineers. Nowadays, it isn't, and it takes longer for support to solve problems."

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

"The technical support needs to improve. When we open a case, it is auto assigned to a support tech person. Nine out of ten times, we get an email right back saying that person is off until tomorrow. I cannot handle that. They just did this over the weekend to us, too. I had to call our rep and have them do something about it."

"I would like to have Snapshots and Snapmail in the next release. People who came from a NetApp background, especially expect these features."

"The solution is expensive."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"The initial setup requires prior experience and technical skills."

"Specifically, when it comes to the file system for the learning system, we encountered performance issues with both Azure and AWS."

"There are challenges related to AWS, such as ensuring proper security measures with IMS code and encryption."

"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."

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

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

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

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

More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) cons

"While the documentation for Ceph Storage is helpful, it could be improved."

"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."

"It needs a better UI for easier installation and management."

"Some documentation is very hard to find."

"The management features are pretty good, but they still have room for improvement."

"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."

"This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing."

"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"The pricing for FlashBlade is between cheap and moderate."

"I understand that it is competitively priced compared to other brands."

"I feel that the price could always be lowered."

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

"The product is very expensive."

"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."

"The price is a little high."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

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

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

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

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

"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."

"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."

"The other big advantage is that Ceph is free software. Compared to traditional SAN based storage, it is very economical."

"If you can afford a product like Red Hat Ceph Storage then go for it. If you cannot, then you need to test Ceph and get your hands dirty."

"We never used the paid support."

"The price of this product isn't high."

"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."

"The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure because we own the hardware."

"The price of Red Hat Ceph Storage is reasonable."

"Most of time, you can get Ceph with the OpenStack solution in a subscription as a bundle."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pricing and cost advice

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

856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Educational Organization

16%

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Educational Organization

12%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Government

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 for FlashBlade is between cheap and moderate. FlashBlade is worth the money due to the experience and per...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?

Its configuration should be easier. There should be easier language for the configuration.

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

How does Red Hat Ceph Storage compare with MiniO?

Red Hat Ceph does well in simplifying storage integration by replacing the need for numerous storage solutions. This ...

See all answers

What do you like most about Red Hat Ceph Storage?

The high availability of the solution is important to us.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Red Hat Ceph Storage?

Areas of Red Hat Ceph Storage that have room for improvement include more promotion. Many people do not know about th...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 20% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 11% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

Dell ECS vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 6% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

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

Compared 52% of the time

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

Compared 10% of the time

Google Cloud Storage vs Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)

Compared 9% of the time

Amazon S3 Glacier vs Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)

Compared 7% of the time

Azure NetApp Files vs Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)

Compared 6% of the time

More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 38% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 6% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 6% of the time

Dell PowerFlex vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 4% of the time

Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

May 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)

June 2025

Download Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) product report

Buyer's Guide

Software Defined Storage (SDS)

May 2025

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

Ceph

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)

Red Hat Ceph Storage is an enterprise open source platform that provides unified software-defined storage on standard, economical servers and disks. With block, object, and file storage combined into one platform, Red Hat Ceph Storage efficiently and automatically manages all your data.

Red Hat

Sample Customers

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

Arcesium, Atlassian, Seeking Alpha, Zend

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

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

June 2025

Free Report: Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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