DataCore SANsymphony vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

DataCore and Red Hat are both solutions in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category. DataCore is ranked #4 with an average rating of 9.3, while Red Hat is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.9. DataCore holds a 7.0% mindshare in SDS, compared to Red Hat’s 19.8% mindshare. Additionally, 97% of DataCore 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 Dec 5, 2024

Red Hat Ceph Storage and DataCore SANsymphony compete in the storage solutions market. Red Hat Ceph has the upper hand in cloud integration and open-source flexibility, while DataCore SANsymphony offers superior performance and efficiency.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage's open-source and highly scalable architecture suits cloud-native applications, integrating well with OpenStack and Kubernetes. It supports block, object, and file storage from a single platform. Ceph's adaptability to various hardware adds to its flexibility. DataCore SANsymphony provides high data throughput with parallel I/O technology, enhancing performance. Its flexibility supports diverse storage devices, and it offers built-in continuous data protection, mirroring, and synchronous replication.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage could streamline its deployment process to be more user-friendly. Improved support for hybrid environments can enhance its offerings. Enhanced user interfaces for configuration and management would be beneficial. DataCore SANsymphony could improve cost-effectiveness to attract a broader range of users. Enhanced integration with other platforms could expand its usability. Simplifying the licensing model may make it more attractive for varied businesses.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat Ceph Storage has a complex deployment model that requires expertise but benefits from community support. DataCore SANsymphony offers straightforward deployment with intuitive management tools and professional support, easing implementation for IT teams.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage is initially cost-effective due to its open-source nature but may incur additional operational costs requiring skilled personnel. DataCore SANsymphony involves higher initial costs but provides a better long-term ROI through efficient resource use and reduced latency, justifying a premium price for organizations valuing performance.

To learn more, read our detailed DataCore SANsymphony vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: August 2025).

Buyer's Guide

DataCore SANsymphony vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

August 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,164 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 Software Defined Storage (SDS) category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 4.4%, up from 4.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of DataCore SANsymphony is 7.0%, up from 6.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 19.8%, down from 21.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Software Defined Storage (SDS)

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

OliverPalz

Senior Consultant at SJT SOLUTIONS GMBH

Provides efficient synchronous mirroring capability and dynamic data management functionality

The initial setup is relatively easy but requires a certified DataCore implementation engineer to deploy the solution in a production environment. The deployment following the qualified procedure, typically takes about a week, depending on the amount of storage and the specific environment. With my experience, I can set up the system within two to four hours; however, the qualification process, which includes detailed planning and testing, adds additional time. It involves gathering the customer's requirements, preparing comprehensive documentation for validation, and conducting tests in collaboration with the customer. This documentation includes a site planning checklist, a pre-installation checklist, and a functional test plan to ensure everything is in order before deployment. Overall, I rate the process an eight.

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 features of this solution are the rewrite speed and the nonstop services."

"Approximately 40% to 50% of my time is saved using Pure Storage FlashBlade compared to different products."

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

"The main feature I have found to be product replication."

"The initial setup is pretty easy and simple."

"I like its size. It is smaller than the other competitors. We can plug in many blades, and we can have data up to one terabyte."

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

"We can capacity plan at a greater level than we used to."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"It is a stable solution."

"An advantage of SANsymphony is its ease of use, especially when installing or upgrading the system."

"The synchronous mirror allows us to operate a fully redundant storage solution that is distributed across two sites."

"The interface is user-friendly."

"The use of the RAM cache allows you to speed up the writing and reading of data while also allowing for a possible increase in performance by increasing the RAM on the servers."

"I am very happy with this product's ability to adapt, increase, and modify existing infrastructures."

"The dashboard is very intuitive, and there are many counters to diagnose what happens during a short period (like when a backup is in progress)."

"The features I have found most valuable are the active-active, or so-called grid technology, and the integration into our VMware-vCenter."

More DataCore SANsymphony pros

"Ceph Storage allows us to add value related to cost and offers a unique experience compared to traditional storage."

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

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

"Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well."

"Data redundancy is a key feature, since it can survive failures (disks/servers). We didn’t lose our data or have a service interruption during server/disk failures."

"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."

"The scalability feature is used by all users and is critical for our operations."

"The solution is pretty stable."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

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

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

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

"The documentational aspect of FlashBlade needs improvement."

"It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release."

"We haven't been able to use much of the cloud area of Pure Storage. We have a storage server and it would be better if it could integrate with other cloud features of this solution."

"The feature that we're waiting on is better integration with the cell services."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"If you're dealing with big databases or transactional databases, it might not be the best-suited solution. The design of DataCore's solution isn't oriented towards this type of data."

"Having an enterprise "Storage Dashboard" that can show capacity, usage, performance, and any issues would be very beneficial."

"Problem detection could be easier. It should help customers identify problems very quickly because it's not easy to analyze on the platform today."

"We'd like to manage the raid on the disk directly in SanSymphony."

"Datacore is developing a new WebUI with new dashboards. It is a good idea as the classic GUI is lacking dashboards."

"DataCore needs a more efficient and better way to keep track of metrics and counters so that we can do baseline analysis to measure performance."

"One limitation of this solution is that it's Windows-based, e.g. one requirement to install DataCore SANsymphony SDS is putting it on a Windows server machine. It relies on Windows and that is a limitation because there are some customers who are looking for non Windows systems."

"The cost is becoming prohibitive since they moved to a subscription model."

More DataCore SANsymphony cons

"The licensing cost is excessively high. This is a significant issue from my perspective."

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

"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."

"Routing around slow hardware."

"Ceph does not deal very well with, or takes a long time to recover from, certain kinds of network failures and individual storage node failures."

"We have encountered slight integration issues."

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

"An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

"The product is very expensive."

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

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

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

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

"The price is a little high."

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

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"This product has a good ratio between quality and price. In many cases, it's less expensive to work with DataCore than other storage systems."

"We have licensing costs on a yearly basis. They charge per terabyte, so in terms of cost, it can be very costly. They have three different features, and you have to pay extra for those."

"Make sure you are made aware of the annual subscription cost when purchasing."

"In my case, the licensing per terabytes is very high and it must be licensed for each extra functionality."

"The pricing and licensing are better with DataCore."

"It is relatively expensive, and the additional costs for hardware and storage can make it a significant investment for customers."

"This solution allows the use of off-the-shelf hardware and charges by the TB of storage."

"Pricing has improved but it is still expensive."

More DataCore SANsymphony pricing and cost advice

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

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

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

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

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

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,164 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

17%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Comms Service Provider

Government

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

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

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for DataCore SANsymphony SDS?

The cost changed from a perpetual license to a subscription model, and it seems reasonable. I am technical personnel ...

See all answers

What do you like most about DataCore SANsymphony?

The dashboard is very intuitive, and there are a lot of counters to diagnose what happens during a short period (like...

See all answers

What needs improvement with DataCore SANsymphony?

In my opinion, there should be improvements in how to get and filter logs. However, this is not a frequent need becau...

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 19% of the time

MinIO 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

Dell ECS vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 5% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

StarWind Virtual SAN vs DataCore SANsymphony

Compared 12% of the time

VMware vSAN vs DataCore SANsymphony

Compared 11% of the time

StorMagic SvSAN vs DataCore SANsymphony

Compared 8% of the time

NetApp ONTAP vs DataCore SANsymphony

Compared 7% of the time

HPE SimpliVity vs DataCore SANsymphony

Compared 7% of the time

More DataCore SANsymphony Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 39% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 6% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 5% of the time

Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 4% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

August 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

DataCore SANsymphony

August 2025

Download DataCore SANsymphony product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

August 2025

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

DataCore Virtual SAN

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

Experience peace of mind with DataCore SANsymphony, the ultimate software-defined storage solution alleviating storage management challenges. Say goodbye to the complexities of managing different storage tiers and disruptions with SANsymphony's block-level storage virtualization technology, empowering you to automate capacity provisioning and data placement across diverse storage environments including SAN, DAS, HCI, and JBOD. Break down silos, control data placement, meet business continuity objectives, boost performance, and seamlessly expand or refresh hardware with SANsymphony. Benefit from features like asynchronous replication for disaster recovery, minimizing data loss, accelerating application responsiveness, and integrating new technology non-disruptively. Trusted by industry leaders like NASA, Thorntons, Inc., and TUI Cruises, DataCore SANsymphony guarantees unparalleled flexibility, scalability, and reliability, ensuring uninterrupted data access and application availability while reducing storage costs and inefficiencies.

DataCore

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

Volkswagen , Maimonides Medical Center, NASA, Thorntons, Inc., TUI, ISCO Industries, Pee Dee Electric Cooperative, United Financial Credit Union, Derby Supply Chain Solutions, Mission Community Hospital, Bellarmine College Preparatory, Colby-Sawyer College, Mount Sinai Health System, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, Quorn Foods, Bitburger, University of Birmingham, Stadtverwaltung Heidelberg, NetEnt to name a few.

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

DataCore SANsymphony vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

August 2025

Free Report: DataCore SANsymphony vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

Find out what your peers are saying about DataCore SANsymphony vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: August 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our DataCore SANsymphony vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.

See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors.

We monitor all Software Defined Storage (SDS) 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.