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

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 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

Pure Storage FlashBlade
Sponsored
Ranking in File and Object Storage
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (15th), Software Defined Storage (SDS) (8th)
NetApp StorageGRID
Ranking in File and Object Storage
9th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat Ceph Storage
Ranking in File and Object Storage
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined Storage (SDS) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2025, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.2%, down from 6.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp StorageGRID is 5.4%, up from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 16.0%, down from 21.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
File and Object Storage Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage16.0%
Pure Storage FlashBlade5.2%
NetApp StorageGRID5.4%
Other73.4%
File and Object Storage
 

Featured Reviews

MikaelHellström - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Michael Lopez - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Systems Engineer at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Has reduced storage costs and improved snapshot management for large data workloads
The advanced features of NetApp StorageGRID which our upper management wouldn't agree to use, include the S3 feature. We are heavy into AWS, and my thoughts were to develop a small dev environment or even a POC environment on-prem. That's still up in the air as we continue on. Currently, AI has taken over everything with a focus on AI. The upgrades of NetApp StorageGRID present a challenge. It's a rolling upgrade, node by node. At one point, one node would not upgrade. The positive aspect is that it didn't take down the entire environment. The environment remained functional on two different versions. The scalability of NetApp StorageGRID has been proven as we've expanded twice. We started with six or seven nodes and have grown to 15 nodes. It does take time for synchronization to complete. From what I've seen, it took a couple of months for it all to sync up once adding nodes. However, it was transparent. It captured the addition and performed effectively, all happening in the background, steadily and surely.
Rifat Rahman - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Among its most appealing features are its ease of handling and minimal maintenance requirements."
"The solution provides many controllers."
"Approximately 40% to 50% of my time is saved using Pure Storage FlashBlade compared to different products."
"It's very easy-to-use."
"The onboarding and integrated monitoring tools are pretty good."
"It has also helped to simplify storage for us in the way that it's easy to manage. Their automatic monitoring really helps when things break or are about to break. They see a problem coming and alert us even before our own system does."
"The initial setup is pretty quick."
"The most valuable feature is Safe Mode."
"NetApp StorageGRID is a great alternative to AWS S3 buckets. Erasure coding is very valuable."
"Right now, we have an older StorageGRID. I like that we can grow it."
"The implementation with NetApp went smoothly. It is a 'setup and forget' type of appliance."
"The backup features are valuable. I've heard from our backup and data protection people that our clients are very satisfied with the performance in junction with the backup, which they archive on this type of object storage."
"The speed of the disks removed the bottleneck from our storage."
"The technical support team is reliable and responsive."
"The scalability is very effective for our customers."
"The features or capabilities of NetApp StorageGRID that I have found the most valuable include scalability, interoperability, and integration options."
"Most valuable features include replication and compression."
"Ceph Storage allows us to add value related to cost and offers a unique experience compared to traditional storage."
"Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."
"The configuration of the solution and the user interface are both quite good."
"Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well."
"Without any extra costs, I was able to provide a redundant environment."
"What I found most valuable from Red Hat Ceph Storage is integration because if you are talking about a solution that consists purely of Red Hat products, this is where integration benefits come in. In particular, Red Hat Ceph Storage becomes a single solution for managing the entire environment in terms of the container or the infrastructure, or the worker nodes because it all comes from a single plug."
"I would definitely recommend Red Hat Ceph Storage. It is a complete solution for cloud-native storage needs."
 

Cons

"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."
"We initially encountered challenges with the assembly process due to issues with the documentation required during setup, an area where Pure Storage needs improvement."
"To improve FlashBlade, some analysts suggest enhancing its handling of relational database management systems and SQL queries."
"Its configuration should be easier."
"On our dedupe during our initial buy, we were expecting a number a little higher like 4x. However, we are getting about 3.6. While it is close enough, it doesn't quite hit the numbers. So, this has been a challenge."
"It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release."
"The Pure Storage Orchestrator is our biggest pain point at the moment. If we can have more say in future developments of feature sets that we will need to support for our use case, that would be pretty beneficial to us."
"There could be improvements in public cloud integration."
"They can enhance the deduplication and compression features, which are crucial for saving more disk space."
"I just recommend improving the marketing campaigns in Pakistan."
"The processes around installation and upgrade need improvement."
"It has its quirks here and there, but it is an older NetApp system."
"The price is something that NetApp could improve, as with most companies. NetApp is known for not being the cheapest storage option, which is also valid for StorageGRID. There are other storage options on the market which we are aware of and have done proofs of concept for, but you cannot really compare the list prices because, as a big user of NetApp storages, we have totally different prices than some list prices. Still, the price information we got for other options are almost always less expensive than StorageGRID."
"The user interface of NetApp StorageGRID might need some tweaks, and configuration is maybe a little bit confusing for those who are not so experienced."
"The redundancy and reliability are great, but I also see room for improvement there. I would like to see more efficiency in the storage and dedupe/compression solutions."
"Beyond the initial setup, this product is a little bit difficult to configure."
"While the documentation for Ceph Storage is helpful, it could be improved."
"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."
"If troubleshooting is needed, the response should be faster."
"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."
"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."
"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."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI."
"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In my opinion, we have paid the right price for the product. I don't think that it is too much or too little."
"It's a costly solution, but Pure Storage FlashBlade doesn't require additional licenses. All of the software is combined into one bundle."
"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."
"I feel that the price could always be lowered."
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
"Our licensing is renewed annually."
"The price of this solution could be made more affordable."
"With respect to pricing, it is okay. This product is mid-range."
"Our licensing is in INR it was around 25 lakhs, which is roughly two million."
"Creating your own data stores, backups, or storage grids, helps eliminate all these costs of downloading all the data back after you downloaded to the cloud."
"We chose NetApp because of price and performance."
"While we have been able to save money on storage costs, it could be better."
"The price is attractive."
"Buying the solution is expensive, but it saves you money down the line when you factor in the logistics of not having to buy tapes."
"I rate the product pricing around five out of ten—it's negotiable, depending on the circumstances."
"We never used the paid support."
"There is no cost for software."
"The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure because we own the hardware."
"The price of this product isn't high."
"The price of Red Hat Ceph Storage is reasonable."
"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"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 other big advantage is that Ceph is free software. Compared to traditional SAN based storage, it is very economical."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.
879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise21
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise11
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise15
 

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...
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...
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...
What do you like most about NetApp StorageGRID?
The management portals have most significantly improved our data retrieval times. They've made it much easier to rest...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp StorageGRID?
As an administrator, I was not involved in the pricing of NetApp StorageGRID. From what I understood, it was cheaper ...
What needs improvement with NetApp StorageGRID?
The upgrades of NetApp StorageGRID present challenges. It's a rolling upgrade, node by node. At one point, one node w...
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 ...
What do you like most about Red Hat Ceph Storage?
The high availability of the solution is important to us.
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...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Storage GRID
Ceph
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ServiceNow, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Motorsport, Dominos, Man AHL
ASE, DARZ GmbH
Dell, DreamHost
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.