NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

NetApp and Red Hat are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. NetApp is ranked #9 with an average rating of 8.0, while Red Hat is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.9. NetApp holds a 5.9% mindshare in FaOS, compared to Red Hat’s 17.9% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of NetApp 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 Nov 4, 2024

Red Hat Ceph Storage and NetApp StorageGRID compete in the enterprise storage market, each offering distinct advantages. Users find Red Hat Ceph Storage favorable for scalability and flexibility, whereas NetApp StorageGRID is preferred for its robust features and enterprise usability.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage offers a scalable architecture, open-source flexibility, and fault-tolerant design, appealing to businesses requiring customization. NetApp StorageGRID excels in advanced data lifecycle management, integrated tiering, and strong compliance features.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage could enhance ease of deployment, user interface simplicity, and comprehensive support documentation. NetApp StorageGRID may improve on cost-effectiveness, user interface flexibility, and performance efficiency in high-demand scenarios.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat Ceph Storage can face challenges during deployment, relying on an active support community. NetApp StorageGRID offers smoother deployment with polished integration services and dependable customer support.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage is cost-effective with favorable ROI, leveraging its open-source nature to reduce setup costs. NetApp StorageGRID incurs higher upfront expenses, justified by its features and performance, offering greater long-term value.

To learn more, read our detailed NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 859,957 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 July 2025, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.8%, down from 6.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp StorageGRID is 5.9%, up from 4.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 17.9%, down from 22.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage

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

Mir Gulzar Ahmed

IT Manager at Synergy Computers

Object-based storage and offers intuitive management tools, making it easy to configure and maintain

The only thing missing is flexibility in configuration to cater to specific customer requirements. Another area of improvement is marketing. NetApp's marketing of StorageGRID isn't optimal. They should present it more effectively, especially in regions like Pakistan. Here, I haven't seen any marketing campaigns from NetApp for StorageGRID or the Solid State Platform (SSP). While StorageGRID is a globally recognized product, I haven't seen any marketing efforts from NetApp in Pakistan. Even competitors are promoting object storage solutions here, but NetApp seems less efficient in selling StorageGRID. There might be one or two customers, but even as a NetApp partner, I'm not aware of any major sales. I've been trained on StorageGRID, and it is a good product. I'm unsure why it hasn't gained traction in Pakistan compared to other countries. So, I just recommend improving the marketing campaigns in Pakistan. I'm pretty confident that if we have one example of successful StorageGRID implementation in Pakistan, other customers will follow suit.

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

"Among its most appealing features are its ease of handling and minimal maintenance requirements."

"The most valuable features of FlashBlade include its replication capabilities, reports, and easy allocation. Everything is user-friendly."

"The initial setup is pretty easy and simple."

"The solution is able to handle workloads and is easy to use. It allows us to actually manage the boxes in less time."

"The solution provides many controllers."

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

"I like its size. It is smaller than the other competitors. We can plug in many blades, and we can have data up to one terabyte."

"The ease of deployment and management has helped us simplify our storage. We also do not have to worry about capacity management as much. A lot of these things are native to Pure Storage."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"The scalability is very effective for our customers."

"The implementation with NetApp went smoothly. It is a 'setup and forget' type of appliance."

"It has enabled us to save money on storage costs. We removed our tape library."

"StorageGRID is designed for cloud-based, highly scalable storage. Think big names like service providers like Google who need massive storage volumes with scalability. It also offers cloud-enabled storage capabilities with cloud management functionality. So, if you prioritize scalability and cloud integration, StorageGRID is the way to go. Its object-based storage is built specifically for that purpose."

"The most valuable feature is tiering."

"NetApp StorageGRID is a great alternative to AWS S3 buckets. Erasure coding is very valuable."

"It improves our operational efficiency."

"The management portals have most significantly improved our data retrieval times. They've made it much easier to restore data compared to our previous methods."

More NetApp StorageGRID pros

"The scalability feature is used by all users and is critical for our operations."

"radosgw and librados provide a simple integration with clone, snapshots, and other functions that aid in data integrity."

"Ceph has simplified my storage integration. I no longer need two or three storage systems, as Ceph can support all my storage needs. I no longer need OpenStack Swift for REST object storage access, I no longer need NFS or GlusterFS for filesystem sharing, and most importantly, I no longer need LVM or DRBD for my virtual machines in OpenStack."

"The solution is pretty stable."

"The ability to provide block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster is very valuable for us."

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

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

"We use the solution for cloud storage."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"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."

"Its configuration should be easier."

"There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."

"They need better integration with public clouds along with a better hybrid solution."

"Pure Storage FlashBlade should improve on more cloud integration."

"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."

"There could be improvements in public cloud integration."

"The documentational aspect of FlashBlade needs improvement."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"The only real issue that we have run into is, when we are cloning, we cannot do a thin provision clone, it has to be a full clone."

"One key improvement I'd like to see in StorageGRID is enhanced visibility for management purposes."

"I would like to see them integrate more with the monitoring platforms. It is a bit difficult to get automated monitoring of the system."

"We want to move towards Azure in the cloud. Right now, the system is all physical."

"If I could change anything in NetApp StorageGRID, that would be pricing."

"There was a small amount of confusion when working with StorageGRID and Active Directory for access. We had to do things three to four times resulting in our engineer troubleshooting a couple of things. The location of the menu, along with what is inside the menu: configurations, settings, etc., is not straightforward to users. Most users are Windows-based. So, when make logical changes to the menu which are not similar to Windows, users and administrators get confused."

"The product's continual innovation and enhancement in integration capabilities with other NetApp solutions could be better."

"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."

More NetApp StorageGRID cons

"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."

"The management features are pretty good, but they still have room for improvement."

"While the documentation for Ceph Storage is helpful, it could be improved."

"Areas of Red Hat Ceph Storage that have room for improvement include more promotion. Many people do not know about the Stratus case, which is one of the most reliable systems available in the world, but they are not aware that a system can keep working even if there is a hardware failure."

"It took me a long time to get the storage drivers for the communication with Kubernetes up and running. The documentation could improve it is lacking information. I'm not sure if this is a Ceph problem or if Ceph should address this, but it was something I ran into. Additionally, there is a performance issue I am having that I am looking into, but overall I am satisfied with the performance."

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

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

"Routing around slow hardware."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

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."

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

"I understand that it is competitively priced compared to other brands."

"It is within reason for what you get. From what we have found comparing it to other vendors, it is in the same range as others. Given the choice, we would definitely redeploy it based on the cost."

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

"I have seen ROI. It has allowed me to increase the density of my VMs without having to purchase anything additional."

"The pricing for FlashBlade is between cheap and moderate."

"The product is very expensive."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"The licensing that the S3 service provides them from a FabricPool standpoint is more attractive than the licensing from AWS or Azure."

"We pay for a license annually."

"I rate the product pricing around five out of ten—it's negotiable, depending on the circumstances."

"NetApp is not known for being the cheapest storage option on the market. Almost all of the other storage options we looked at were less expensive than StorageGRID. The price is one thing to criticize, which is what we hear internally and from customers as well. They find the cost of the terabytes in this class of storage a little bit higher than expected."

"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."

"Our licensing is in INR it was around 25 lakhs, which is roughly two million."

"While we have been able to save money on storage costs, it could be better."

"The price is attractive."

More NetApp StorageGRID pricing and cost advice

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

"There is no cost for software."

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

"We never used the paid support."

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

"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."

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

859,957 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

14%

Educational Organization

12%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

21%

Manufacturing Company

20%

Computer Software Company

16%

Government

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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 for FlashBlade is between cheap and moderate. FlashBlade is worth the money due to the experience and per...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?

Its configuration should be easier. There should be easier language for the configuration.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp StorageGRID?

It would definitely be more on the expensive side, especially if you compare it with open source solutions like Ceph.

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetApp StorageGRID?

If I could change anything in NetApp StorageGRID, that would be pricing. In terms of functionality, reliability, and ...

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 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

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 20% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 11% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 9% of the time

Supermicro SuperBlade vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 2% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

MinIO vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 26% of the time

Dell ECS vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 22% of the time

Scality RING vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 6% of the time

Hitachi Content Platform vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 5% of the time

VAST Data vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 3% of the time

More NetApp StorageGRID Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 37% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 6% of the time

Dell PowerFlex vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 4% of the time

Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 4% 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

June 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID

June 2025

Download NetApp StorageGRID product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

June 2025

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

Storage GRID

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

Store and manage unstructured data at scale using NetApp StorageGRID for secure, durable object storage. Place content in the right location, at the right time, and on the right storage tier, optimizing workflows and reducing overall costs for globally distributed rich media.

NetApp

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

ASE, DARZ GmbH

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

June 2025

Free Report: NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

859,957 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our NetApp StorageGRID 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.