IBM SAN40B-4 vs IBM SAN768B comparison

IBM SAN40B-4 and IBM SAN768B are both solutions in the Enterprise SAN category. IBM SAN40B-4 is ranked #17, while IBM SAN768B is ranked #13. IBM SAN40B-4 holds a 1.8% mindshare in ES, compared to IBM SAN768B’s 3.0% mindshare.

IBM SAN40B-4

114 Views
114 Comparison Views

IBM SAN768B

164 Views
164 Comparison Views

IBM SAN40B-4

IBM SAN768B

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM SAN40B-4 and IBM SAN768B based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco and others in Enterprise SAN.

To learn more, read our detailed Enterprise SAN Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Enterprise SAN

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,757 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 SAN40B-4

Ranking in Enterprise SAN

17th

Average Rating

0.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

IBM SAN768B

Ranking in Enterprise SAN

13th

Average Rating

0.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Enterprise SAN category, the mindshare of IBM SAN40B-4 is 1.8%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM SAN768B is 3.0%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Enterprise SAN Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
IBM SAN768B	3.0%
IBM SAN40B-4	1.8%
Other	95.2%

Enterprise SAN

Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco and others in Enterprise SAN. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Comparisons

IBM SAN48B-5 vs IBM SAN40B-4

Compared 100% of the time

More IBM SAN40B-4 Competitors

IBM SAN80B-4 vs IBM SAN768B

Compared 71% of the time

Cisco MDS Series vs IBM SAN768B

Compared 29% of the time

More IBM SAN768B Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Enterprise SAN

February 2026

Download IBM SAN40B-4 product report

Buyer's Guide

Enterprise SAN

February 2026

Download IBM SAN768B product report

Also Known As

SAN40B-4

SAN768B

Overview

The IBM System Storage SAN40B-4 SAN fabric switch provides 24, 32 or 40 active ports and is designed for high performance with 8 Gbps link speeds and backward compatibility to support links running at 4, 2 and 1 Gbps link speeds. High availability features make it suitable for use as a core switch in midrange environments or as an edge-switch in enterprise environments where a wide range of storage area network (SAN) infrastructure simplification and business continuity configurations are possible.

IBM

IBM System Storage SAN768B fabric backbones is a Fibre Channel switching infrastructure offerings that provide the foundation for reliable, scalable, high-performance storage. The System Storage SAN b-type family switch leverages Gen 5 Fibre Channel and Fabric Vision technology to deliver long-term solutions for mission-critical applications that require secure, high-performance, low-latency storage networks.

IBM

Sample Customers

Cosan, EF Education First, Intesa Sanpaolo Assicura S.p.A., Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd., Kelsey-Seybold Clinic, American National Bank

Einstein Healthcare, Hansgrohe SE, Yaap Digital Services

Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco and others in Enterprise SAN. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Enterprise SAN vendors.

We monitor all Enterprise SAN 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.