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 (9th), Container Management (12th), Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms (6th), Agile and DevOps Services (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 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 12.1%, up from 11.5% 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."
"We have control of the ESXi."
"The most valuable attribute is the platform's ability to consistently deliver high reliability."
"Excellent technical support."
"The product's framework is good, it integrates well with API Connect, and the private cloud allows for use in any location."
"OpenShift offers robust tools for monitoring application traffic, allowing us to analyze client requests and other business-related metrics."
"Red Hat OpenShift helped us with managing scaling up and scaling down."
"The solution provides a lot of flexibility to the application team for running their applications in the container platform, without needing to monitor the entire infrastructure all the time. It automatically scales and automatically self-heals. There is also a mechanism to alert the team in case it is over-committing or overutilizing the application."
"In terms of implementation, OpenShift is very user-friendly, which is an advantage. We are using it along with GitLab for implementing CI/CD pipelines. That's a feature that other products also have, but in OpenShift, we find it good."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is the great customer service and the ability for our team to get assistance when we need it."
"This solution helps us to account for peak seasons involving higher demand than usual. It also gives us confidence in the security of our overall systems."
"Excellent GUI support, so one does not need to use the command line client for almost any tasks. Great support for building images directly from Git repositories with hooks."
"The most valuable feature is the high availability for the applications."
 

Cons

"lacking in multi-cloud management."
"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."
"The support and pricing need to improve."
"One issue with the solution is latency because there is lag time when we connect."
"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."
"I want easier node management and more user-friendly scripts for installing master and worker nodes."
"Managing batches in Red Hat OpenShift has been a significant challenge."
"While Red Hat OpenShift is stable, monitoring and reporting capabilities need improvement. Integration with tools like Grafana and Prometheus is necessary for capturing logs, and manually managing these aspects is time-consuming."
"I had to frequently upgrade my cluster due to OpenShift's rolling updates every six months, which I found to be excessive."
"They could work on the pricing model, making it more flexible and possibly lower."
"The speed of deploying new applications can be improved."
"OpenShift can improve monitoring. Sometimes there are issues. Additionally, the solution could benefit from protective tools if something was to happen in our network."
"OpenShift requires a very expensive and complex infrastructure. These demands can deter people from learning OpenShift."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We pay annual licensing fees."
"I rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten."
"In general, the cost is on the higher side."
"The solution is expensive."
"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."
"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."
"We are currently using the open version, OKD. We plan to get the enterprise version in the future."
"The licensing cost for OpenShift is expensive when compared to other products. RedHat also charges you additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees."
"It's important to start small because the solution is scalable. We can build our cluster and look at the bundle option, not the external subscriptions. Talking to the people at Red Hat can save us money."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which PaaS Clouds solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Recruiting/Hr Firm
19%
Real Estate/Law Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
University
8%
Financial Services Firm
30%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
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: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.