IBM Cloud Object Storage vs Pure Storage FlashBlade comparison

IBM and Pure Storage are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. IBM is ranked #12 with an average rating of 9.3, while Pure Storage is ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.8. IBM holds a 1.1% mindshare in FaOS, compared to Pure Storage’s 5.3% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Pure Storage users who would recommend it.

IBM Cloud Object Storage

Read 8 IBM Cloud Object Storage reviews

964 Views
790 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Pure Storage FlashBlade

Read 39 Pure Storage FlashBlade reviews

5,227 Views
3,502 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

IBM Cloud Object Storage

Pure Storage FlashBlade

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

IBM Cloud Object Storage and Pure Storage FlashBlade are both strong competitors in the data storage category, each with unique advantages. IBM Cloud Object Storage excels in adaptability and security, whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade stands out for superior performance and data processing capabilities.

Features: IBM Cloud Object Storage offers high scalability, robust security features, and a wide geographical reach ideal for secure data storage. Pure Storage FlashBlade provides unmatched data throughput, efficient processing for high-computational needs, and excellent speed and performance for data analytics.

Room for Improvement: IBM Cloud Object Storage could enhance its customization options and user interface. Additionally, networking protocols might need improvements for smoother integration. Pure Storage FlashBlade could work on reducing setup complexity and improving the upfront cost efficiency. A better GUI and more cost-effective disaster recovery options could be beneficial.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM Cloud Object Storage offers straightforward deployment with extensive support, ideal for businesses seeking minimal setup time. Pure Storage FlashBlade provides streamlined deployment and tailored support, focusing on performance optimization for tech-savvy companies.

Pricing and ROI: IBM Cloud Object Storage features a flexible pricing structure that is cost-effective over time, appealing to businesses looking for substantial ROI. Pure Storage FlashBlade, with higher initial costs, offers significant ROI through high performance and efficiency, making it attractive for organizations prioritizing speed and processing power.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Pure Storage FlashBlade Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Pure Storage FlashBlade

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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

IBM Cloud Object Storage

Ranking in File and Object Storage

12th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Pure Storage FlashBlade

Ranking in File and Object Storage

8th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

All-Flash Storage (12th), Software Defined Storage (SDS) (8th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of IBM Cloud Object Storage is 1.1%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.3%, down from 6.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Pure Storage FlashBlade	5.3%
IBM Cloud Object Storage	1.1%
Other	93.6%

File and Object Storage

Featured Reviews

reviewer2384904

Account Technology Specialist at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

Enables seamless data replication and supports comprehensive data analytics workflows

The capability to replicate data in different locations is valuable since it enables customers to have a cluster over various sites. Also, important is the capability to provide RESTful APIs for custom connectors. In terms of security, I advise customers to rotate access keys to enhance protection. Additionally, scalability is effortless as you can add nodes or expand the license.

Read full review

MikaelHellström

IT Manager at Regin Dalarna

Has handled backup storage needs reliably and supports seamless upgrades

In environments requiring high throughput and low latency, Pure Storage FlashBlade provides high throughput and normal latency, but we do not have any application that requires low latency right now, so the latency of three to five milliseconds is considered kind of high. Pure Storage FlashBlade's ability to integrate with enterprise applications is not important for us, as we only want to present an S3 bucket for our backup, which we have done, and it works very fast. We use the Purity software's data reduction techniques; we have a backup software that compresses everything before sending it to the S3 bucket, achieving a data reduction of 1.1 to one. I would recommend Pure Storage FlashBlade to other companies because it's a very fast and scalable solution for anyone who needs it. On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution an 8.

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

"IBM Cloud Object Storage integrates well."

"The standout feature of IBM Cloud Object Storage is its top-notch security, making it ideal for sensitive applications like mobile financial transactions."

"One of Cloud Object Storage's best features is infinite capacity. This is one of the main advantages if you don't want to use your own storage. You also have the ability to write only, write once, and read many. It's like tape storage but software-based. This feature is essential for financial institutions that require that kind of protection if you write backup or data there."

"The most valuable feature I like is when you connect it via CLI plug-in...It is a stable solution."

"The integration itself is pretty easy. The access appliances create the connection between both environments."

"IBM has the most number of additional services, this is the main advantage."

"The capability to replicate data in different locations is valuable since it enables customers to have a cluster over various sites."

"Overall, I rate IBM Cloud Object Storage a ten out of ten."

"The tool's most valuable features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective."

"The solution provides many controllers."

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

"The initial setup is pretty easy and simple."

"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."

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

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

"The tool's most valuable feature is its fast performance, especially in handling snapshots. It helps during power outages when we need to quickly move data between different data centers. It ensures efficient replication and helps maintain our data centers' uptime."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

Cons

"IBM has limited cloud storage."

"One area where IBM Cloud Object Storage could potentially improve is in modernizing its underlying codebase."

"Sometimes technical support lacks a comprehensive understanding of the entire solution, only focusing on the product they support."

"If I had to choose one area, it would be making the consoles more intuitive would be helpful. Sometimes, they can be a little complicated if you're not familiar with them."

"Room for improvement depends on customer needs. Some customers prefer pure Object Storage using the S3 protocol, while others use a gateway in front of the storage grid to enable CIFS or NFS."

"The performance could be better. It isn't bad, but everything is network-based, so you have a performance penalty on the network. You can never achieve the same performance as hardware. That's the disadvantage of cloud storage solutions in general. Cloud performance is one of the main issues clients have."

"The performance could improve in IBM Cloud Object Storage. The throughput or objects per second can have degradation."

"One improvement could be incorporating a feature similar to Dropbox's version history. This would allow users to track modifications made to files over time, which is particularly important for maintaining a record of changes. While the free version might not include this feature, it could be included in the paid version to provide added value to clients. Additionally, having a version history feature that allows users to access modifications made to files over the past three months could be beneficial."

More IBM Cloud Object Storage cons

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

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

"In terms of scalability, it doesn't expand out quite as robustly as some of the others, but it covers 90% of the market in what it does."

"The solution is expensive."

"I would like to see more deduplication."

"I would like to see better integration."

"In terms of technical support, the experience has been mixed. The support is done through email and is not that great, making it a very problematic area I've been dealing with for over four years."

"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."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"IBM Cloud is cheaper than AWS. If you want to scale your cloud infrastructure, it can be bought at almost the same price."

"Pricing is not cheap."

"You have the option of a monthly or yearly license. Most customers choose the monthly option. I understand what you would like to say. IBM also lets you choose among four types of Cloud Object Storage. The difference is usage, performance, etc. Of course, high-performance storage is more expensive, while low-performance storage is for cold data, and it's really cheap."

"Like most cloud providers, IBM likely charges based on storage capacity, typically per gigabyte or terabyte. Their pricing is competitive when compared to AWS or Microsoft."

"The product is very expensive."

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

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

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

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

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

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

More Pure Storage FlashBlade 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

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

25%

Computer Software Company

16%

Government

University

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	4

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	21

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Cloud Object Storage?

The integration itself is pretty easy. The access appliances create the connection between both environments.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Cloud Object Storage?

In general, Object Storage should be a cheaper solution.

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Cloud Object Storage?

The interface can feel clunky and outdated compared to AWS S3 or Azure Blob Storage. While scalable, latency can be an issue for high-throughput applications, especially during peak load times. I...

See all answers

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 outages when we need to quickly move data between different data centers. It ensure...

See all answers

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

Regarding pricing, it is okay; we needed exactly this in size, and the price was a lot lower than competitors, making it good for us.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?

In my opinion, one way Pure Storage FlashBlade can be improved is by having more compatibility between the FlashArray and FlashBlade, allowing for synchronized data between both platforms.

See all answers

Comparisons

MinIO vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 26% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 19% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 14% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 8% of the time

IBM Spectrum Scale vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 8% of the time

More IBM Cloud Object Storage Competitors

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 18% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 9% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 9% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 7% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 6% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage

January 2026

Download IBM Cloud Object Storage product report

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

January 2026

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Also Known As

Cleversafe

No data available

Overview

IBM Cloud Object Storage is a web-scale platform that stores unstructured data - from petabyte to exabyte - with reliability, security, availability and disaster recovery without replication.

IBM

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

Sample Customers

Bitly, Dreamstime, Prime Research

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

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Pure Storage FlashBlade

December 2025

Free Report: IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Pure Storage FlashBlade

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Pure Storage FlashBlade and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Pure Storage FlashBlade 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.