MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

MinIO and Red Hat are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. MinIO is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0, while Red Hat is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.8. MinIO holds a 18.4% mindshare in FaOS, compared to Red Hat’s 17.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of MinIO 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 Jul 27, 2025

Red Hat Ceph Storage and MinIO compete in the object storage space. Red Hat Ceph Storage has the upper hand in enterprise support, while MinIO excels in providing superior performance features.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage offers robust block, object, and file storage, high reliability with commodity hardware, and strong integration capabilities for a variety of environments. MinIO provides high-performance object storage, reliable erasure coding, and strong data protection mechanisms, making it ideal for hybrid environments.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage could improve in synchronous object storage scenarios and addressing limitations in features when compared to OEM products. It may also enhance its user interface for easier management. MinIO could benefit from expanding its support services, providing more detailed documentation for advanced features, and enhancing its direct customer support to match enterprise needs.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat Ceph Storage offers a streamlined deployment process, extensive support network, and comprehensive documentation aiding enterprise-level implementations. MinIO's simple architecture ensures a rapid deployment and an easy-to-use interface, but it puts less emphasis on direct support services, which might require more technical expertise for troubleshooting.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage typically involves higher upfront costs due to its enterprise features, balanced by strong support and scalable ROI potential. MinIO is economically priced with its open-source model, offering significant cost advantages and quick ROI from its efficient storage solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 867,445 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 September 2025, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.7%, down from 6.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MinIO is 18.4%, down from 23.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 17.8%, down from 22.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage	17.8%
MinIO	18.4%
Pure Storage FlashBlade	5.7%
Other	58.099999999999994%

File and Object Storage

Q&A Highlights

Netanya Carmi

Content Manager at PeerSpot

Nov 07, 2021

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 solution allows for multiple copies of replicated and coded pools to be kept, easy replacement of failed hard drives, and easy replacement of scaled-out nodes. Red Hat Ceph continues working even when there are failures. We experienced some stability issues when we went beyond the default factor, which is 3. We found that the rebalancing and recovery processes can be a bit slow. Red Hat Ceph can be pretty complex to deploy and has a very big learning curve. MinIO is software-defined, runs in industry-standard hardware, and is an open-source solution. The retrieval of objects with MinIO is significantly better than many of the other solutions we considered. We found deployment to be very simple and even with numerous updates, MinIO ran seamlessly - we experienced no downtime. MinIO is amazing with regard to processing speed, volume, and accessibility to data. It can store large amounts of data, and you can retrieve, load, and transform the data quickly. MinIO offers both a browser interface and a command interface, which we found very useful. MinIO is lacking in a few documentation and monitoring tools that other solutions provide, though. It would be a better and more flexible solution if you could use an uneven disk structure. It would also be great to include some sort of graphical representation of data, like size and data type. Conclusion: We were looking for a high-performance object storage system that would work well with enterprise systems. We found that MinIO offered the stability and scalability in addition to the ability to deploy on-premise, in the cloud, or hybrid options most suitable for our needs.

See all answers

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

Abdelrahim-Ahmad

Data Scientist at a tech vendor with 501-1,000 employees

Provides good object storage functionalities

MinIO should provide an easier subscription model for companies that don't have a huge amount of data. Our company has a maximum of 100 terabytes of data. The solution should provide more bugging tools in the open-source version to encourage people to buy the support services. It's not an easy decision. If I go to the management and tell them that I need to buy a service, there should be an easier subscription model for companies that don't have huge amounts of data. For me, getting a subscription for 15,000 a year for a system already in production might be a bit hard. I think MinIO supports a minimum of one petabyte or 100 terabytes of data. Since we don't have such huge amounts of data, buying a subscription for the solution is a bit difficult. Hence, we're only using the open-source version for now. If MinIO becomes really crucial for our business, we could ask the management to get a subscription.

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 initial setup was straightforward. If you know how to plug in power and network you're pretty much qualified. They were on site to configure the network, the box to fit into our network architecture. Other than that, we self-managed from there."

"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."

"The most valuable features include the ease of implementation, ease of use and the speed that you can do backup and recovery on."

"It performs well and it is also very fast."

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

"The snapshots, replication, and the ability to have immutable blades are the most valuable features. You're putting data snapshots out in those blades, and they cannot be touched. Its performance is great."

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

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

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"Saves a lot of time in generating and managing documents."

"Good interface and a good approach to development and testing environments."

"This is an all-in-one, user-friendly data storage."

"I like that if you have a problem, you can buy the home server. It is stable and robust."

"It performs efficiently compared to other solutions."

"The initial setup was straightforward as MinIO provided good support documentation and took a couple of days to complete."

"The most valuable feature is the ease of management and administration."

"I use the solution's basic object storage functionalities, like AWS S3 compatible APIs and creating buckets."

More MinIO pros

"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."

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

"The setup is very easy, deserving a ten out of ten."

"We have not encountered any stability issues for the product."

"Without any extra costs, I was able to provide a redundant environment."

"I would definitely recommend Red Hat Ceph Storage. It is a complete solution for cloud-native storage needs."

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

"Most valuable features include replication and compression."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"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."

"I would also like to see better support for CIFS workloads."

"File storage needs a lot of improvement. Mainframe connectivity also needs improvement because it requires additional components to be integrated with Pure Storage FlashBlade. If you want to keep your backup data, then this becomes an even more expensive solution because Pure Storage FlashBlade will not be able to meet your backup needs."

"The speed could be improved."

"The documentational aspect of FlashBlade needs improvement."

"The solution is expensive."

"It usually comes down to just what you hit and the value you're getting when you spend the money and license the products. I would always go, "If you want to make things better, lower your price and make your licensing simpler." There's always an opportunity around that."

"An area for improvement in Pure Storage FlashBlade is its price. It could be reduced. The technical support for Pure Storage FlashBlade also needs improvement. It used to be good, with more experienced engineers. Nowadays, it isn't, and it takes longer for support to solve problems."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"MinIO could use a time patch on it. It could also use better documentation for some languages like Python."

"Its reverse proxy features could be better."

"The product's initial setup phase is complex."

"The solution lacks documentation."

"We had minor bugs occasionally."

"There should be the ability to expand the size after it has already been deployed. Currently, you cannot do that. It doesn't support an increase in size. Each time we spawn a new MinIO, we need to track the particular MinIO instance or tenant that has the file. Therefore, we had to create a multi-tenant solution that tracks the MinIO that has our artifacts. It isn't in one single instance. It should have better multi-tenancy support."

"The only downside I see is that you do not have a complete picture of an object."

"The MinIO dashboard is minimal as there are only a couple of features inside the dashboard for a basic user. I would like this to be more robust with more click-around features."

More MinIO cons

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

"I have not identified any drawbacks, however, the response to public platform inquiries could be faster."

"I have encountered issues with stability when replication factor was not 3, which is the default and recommended value. Go below 3 and problems will arise."

"Ceph is not a mature product at this time. Guides are misleading and incomplete. You will meet all kind of bugs and errors trying to install the system for the first time. It requires very experienced personnel to support and keep the system in working condition, and install all necessary packets."

"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."

"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"In my opinion, we have paid the right price for the product. I don't think that it is too much or too little."

"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 price is a little high."

"The product is very expensive."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"Support is a separate line item. Support is a different cost, but whatever your support is now, that's what you're going to pay forever. If your support's $100 today, six years from now it's $100. It doesn't fluctuate unless you upgrade it, or change it, etc."

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

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"We use the solution's open-source version."

"This solution is open source so it is free."

"This is an open-source solution but I am using the licensed version."

"MinIO is a free open-source solution."

"My company hasn't tried the version of the solution where we need to pay to use it."

"We use the solution's open-source version."

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

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

"We never used the paid support."

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

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

"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."

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

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage 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

867,445 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

17%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Educational Organization

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	20

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	9

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	13
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	15

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

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 MinIO?

I like that if you have a problem, you can buy the home server. It is stable and robust.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for MinIO?

We use the solution's open-source version.

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

What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat Ceph Storage?

I do not have experience working with solutions such as Red Hat Ceph Storage and StorPool. I have plenty of experienc...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 20% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 8% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 5% of the time

Qumulo vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 3% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

NetApp StorageGRID vs MinIO

Compared 9% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs MinIO

Compared 5% of the time

Cloudian HyperStore vs MinIO

Compared 4% of the time

VAST Data vs MinIO

Compared 4% of the time

Scality RING vs MinIO

Compared 4% of the time

More MinIO Competitors

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 5% 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

Dell PowerFlex vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% 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

MinIO

August 2025

Download MinIO product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

August 2025

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

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

MinIO is an open-source object storage system. It is designed to efficiently store and retrieve unstructured data, such as photos, videos, and backups. MinIO can be used as a standalone object storage server or as part of a larger system, such as a data lake or a private cloud, and can be deployed on-premise, in the cloud, or in a hybrid environment, making it a flexible storage solution for a variety of use cases.

MinIO’s features include erasure coding, bitrot protection, and checksum validation, which help ensure data integrity and reliability. The solution’s multi-tenancy support makes it ideal for multi-user environments. MinIO’s edge computing tools enable data storage and processing closer to users' locations, reducing latency and improving performance. MinIO can easily scale to accommodate storage and power demands, making it ideal for use in large-scale, data-intensive environments.

MinIO Benefits and Features:

MinIO offers several key benefits and features for organizations looking for a scalable and high-performing object storage solution:

Scalability: Horizontally scale to increase storage space and processing power as your needs grow.

High performance: MinIO’s edge computing and low latency provide fast data access.

Seamless integrations: MinIO is compatible with the Amazon S3 API, which enables integration with third-party systems and tools.

Data integrity: Security features, such as erasure coding, bitrot protection, and checksum validation, ensure data integrity and reliability.

Reduced costs: MinIO is an open-source solution, making it a cost-effective option for organizations looking for a scalable object storage solution.

Support: MinIO’s large open-source community of developers and users provides a wide range of resources and an active support network

Multi-tenancy: Multi-tenancy support makes MinIO suitable for use in multi-user environments.

Easy deployment: MinIO is easy to deploy and can run on a variety of platforms, including on-premise, in the cloud, or in a hybrid environment.

Access control: Role-based access control, enabling you to control access to data based on users permissions.

Event notifications: Automate workflows based on changes to objects in your storage.

Cross-region replication: Duplicate data between different regions for disaster recovery and data backup.

Intuitive interface: MinIO’s user-friendly dashboard can be accessed via any browser and can be used to perform multiple object operations including object creation and management.

Reviews from Real Users

MinIO stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Several major ones are its flexibility, integration options, and performance.

Süleyman Fazıl Y., a senior software engineer at a tech services company, writes, “The most valuable features are that MinIO is open, it works on-premise, and is compatible with the Amazon industry which is great for finding compatible libraries in many languages which is very good for developers.”

Rebecca S., CTO at NIASE, says, “MinIO is much improved over the prior solution, updates are simple to apply, and we anticipate that future capacity requirements will be easier to meet. Our customers are using this solution to retrieve tens of thousands of objects (documents and files) per hour, and MinIO seems to be able to keep up with it.”

MinIO

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

Information Not Available

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

July 2025

Free Report: MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

867,445 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage 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.