Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

IBM Cloud Private vs Red Hat OpenShift comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

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 Private
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
20th
Average Rating
6.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Server Virtualization Software (10th), Container Management (12th), Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms (6th), Agile and DevOps Services (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the PaaS Clouds category, the mindshare of IBM Cloud Private is 0.8%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat OpenShift is 12.0%, up from 11.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

CristianIriazabal - PeerSpot reviewer
A solution that ranks in the top five and integrates well with API Connect
One issue with the solution is latency because there is lag time when we connect from Argentina to IBM's data centers in Washington and Dallas. It would be a benefit to have a data center in Latin America. The solution does not offer many routes over the cloud that are available with other solutions such as AWS which is a leader in the industry.
Pratul Shukla - PeerSpot reviewer
Adopting a flexible and efficient approach with noticeable improvements in operational costs and continued challenges in job management
Currently, one of the biggest challenges we face is with services and jobs. For spawning batches, although it has crons, it is not easy to integrate with enterprise systems such as Autosys. The entire company uses Autosys, but we are not able to integrate it effectively. We need intermediate servers to run OC utility commands and initiate the cron job. We have to do a lot of modifications to ensure our batches work properly. With physical or virtual servers, even in AWS, we are able to write and manage multiple jobs. Managing batches in Red Hat OpenShift has been a significant challenge. Integrating third parties is a challenge with Red Hat OpenShift. For example, with Elasticsearch, onboarding itself was difficult, running file beats and dealing with routing issues. It is not straightforward, especially since we have some components in AWS as. AWS has many capabilities that come out of the box and are easier to work with compared to Red Hat OpenShift. Red Hat OpenShift's biggest disadvantage is they do not provide any private cloud setup where we can host on our site using their services. The main reason we went with Red Hat OpenShift was because it is a private cloud, and we have regulatory requirements that prevent us from using public cloud.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Our core banking process was monolithic. To address this, we transitioned to a microservices-based architecture. Leveraging Microsoft technologies, including Terminals version 23, we’ve revamped our banking operations. Not all services are microservices; some remain monolithic for simplicity. Containerization is pivotal, with OpenShift (based on Kubernetes and Docker) managing our microservices."
"The most valuable attribute is the platform's ability to consistently deliver high reliability."
"The product's framework is good, it integrates well with API Connect, and the private cloud allows for use in any location."
"We have control of the ESXi."
"Excellent technical support."
"A valuable feature of Red Hat OpenShift is its ability to handle increased loads by automatically adding nodes."
"It has features that enhance security, ease of deployment, and service exposure compared to Kubernetes."
"OpenShift is based on Kubernetes and we try to use all the Kubernetes objects of OpenShift. We don't use features that are specific to OpenShift, except internal certificates for the services. The one feature that is missing from Kubernetes and that is really useful in OpenShift is the lifecycle of the cluster and the ease of installation. We use VMware and VMware integration internally with the OpenShift installer, which is very good. With OpenShift it's easy to spin up or scale out a cluster."
"Great integration with Jenkins for constant integration and development. Supports all the major languages and environments - PHP, Java, Node.js, Ruby, etc."
"OpenShift offers an easy-to-use graphical user interface for cluster management, making it more accessible for administrators."
"OpenShift offers more stability than Kubernetes."
"The initial setup is simple, and OpenShift is open-source, so it's easy to install on any cloud platform."
"OpenShift offers robust tools for monitoring application traffic, allowing us to analyze client requests and other business-related metrics."
 

Cons

"The support and pricing need to improve."
"lacking in multi-cloud management."
"Auto-scaling and managing pod scaling in the microservices architecture, a core feature of IBM Cloud Private, can pose challenges, especially when dealing with larger volumes of traffic."
"One issue with the solution is latency because there is lag time when we connect."
"I've noticed that the satellite services layer requires some improvement compared to platforms like Azure or Microsoft. While it's in development, I believe the satellite layer has room for enhancement. Additionally, the DevOps layer could benefit from closer integrations, especially for using external applications like Jenkins."
"There have been some issues with security, in particular, that we had to address. At times they make it “clunky." I am quite confident these parameters will appear in the next releases. They have been reported as bugs and are actually in process."
"Latency and performance are two areas of concern in OpenShift where improvements are required."
"The whole area around the hybrid cloud could be improved. I would like to deploy a Red Hat OpenShift cluster on-premise and on the cloud, then have Red Hat do the entire hybrid cloud management."
"They could work on the pricing model, making it more flexible and possibly lower."
"The platform's documentation could be more comprehensive to cover the full spectrum of user needs. Sometimes, achieving specific goals is challenging due to a lack of detailed guidance."
"This solution could be improved by offering best practices on standardization and additional guidance on how to use this solution."
"The area for improvement is mostly in support for legacy applications."
"OpenShift requires a very expensive and complex infrastructure. These demands can deter people from learning OpenShift."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."
"In general, the cost is on the higher side."
"We pay annual licensing fees."
"I rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten."
"Pricing of OpenShift depends on the number of nodes and who is hosting it."
"We use the license-free version of Red Hat Openshift but we pay for the support."
"Depending on the extent of the product use, licenses are available for a range of time periods, and are renewable at the end of the period."
"The cost is quite high."
"We had a Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) license for all our servers' operating systems. By having multiple Red Hat products together, you can negotiate costs and leverage on having a sort of enterprise license agreement to reduce the overall outlay or TCO."
"The pricing is standard; the solution isn't particularly expensive or affordable."
"The product's support is expensive. I would rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten."
"The licensing cost for OpenShift is expensive when compared to other products. RedHat also charges you additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which PaaS Clouds solutions are best for your needs.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
29%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Cloud Private?
Our core banking process was monolithic. To address this, we transitioned to a microservices-based architecture. Leveraging Microsoft technologies, including Terminals version 23, we’ve revamped ou...
What needs improvement with IBM Cloud Private?
I've noticed that the satellite services layer requires some improvement compared to platforms like Azure or Microsoft. While it's in development, I believe the satellite layer has room for enhance...
How does OpenShift compare with Amazon AWS?
Open Shift makes managing infrastructure easy because of self-healing and automatic scaling. There is also a wonderful dashboard mechanism to alert us in case the application is over-committing or ...
Which would you recommend - Pivotal Cloud Foundry or OpenShift?
Pivotal Cloud Foundry is a cloud-native application platform to simplify app delivery. It is efficient and effective. The best feature is how easy it is to handle external services such as database...
What do you like most about OpenShift?
OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins.
 

Also Known As

ICP
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ilmarinen Mutual Pension Insurance Company
UPS, Cathay Pacific, Hilton
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Cloud Private vs. Red Hat OpenShift and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.