Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

Nutanix and Red Hat are both solutions in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category. Nutanix is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.7, while Red Hat is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.8. Nutanix holds a 5.0% mindshare in SDS, compared to Red Hat’s 18.4% mindshare. Additionally, 98% of Nutanix 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 Nutanix Unified Storage are enterprise solutions in the scalable and reliable storage market. Red Hat Ceph often surpasses Nutanix with more competitive pricing and support satisfaction, whereas Nutanix gains favor with its comprehensive feature set, appealing to those prioritizing advanced capabilities.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage offers advantages with its scalability, open-source flexibility, and support for block, object, and file storage, catering well to diverse infrastructure needs. Nutanix Unified Storage distinguishes itself with integrated data services, seamless deployment within Nutanix's hyper-converged infrastructure, and robust analytics, enhancing data insight and management. For organizations emphasizing integration within their systems, Nutanix provides a more cohesive solution.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph could enhance its user-friendliness and technical support to cater to less technically adept users. Greater interoperability with existing systems and improved native analytics would also add value. Nutanix Unified Storage could benefit from price optimization, as its higher initial cost is a concern. Additionally, providing more customization options and simplified integration processes would further solidify its market position.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Nutanix Unified Storage is noted for its straightforward deployment and excellent customer service, largely due to its integration with Nutanix hyper-converged solutions. This focus on user experience and support is key for customers seeking streamlined operations. Red Hat Ceph Storage, while flexible, requires more expertise and presents certain complexities during deployment, potentially deterring users favoring simplicity.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph offers lower initial costs and is appealing to budget-conscious organizations, delivering reliable ROI in scalable operations. Nutanix Unified Storage, while involving a higher upfront investment, offers substantial ROI through its advanced features and integration capabilities, making it attractive for those prioritizing a feature-rich path despite the higher financial outlay.

To learn more, read our detailed Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 872,008 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 October 2025, in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 4.1%, down from 4.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) is 5.0%, up from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 18.4%, down from 20.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Software Defined Storage (SDS) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage	18.4%
Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)	5.0%
Pure Storage FlashBlade	4.1%
Other	72.5%

Software Defined Storage (SDS)

Featured Reviews

MikaelHellström

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.

Read full review

Amarnath Charugundla

System Engineer at Tata Consultancy

Unified management and cost-effectiveness lead to positive experiences and future savings

Improvement is necessary wherein the memory or storage should not breach 90%, because if breached, it becomes unmanageable. We have to set alerts or CPU triggering for 95% for the first warning. Other activities on nodes or file systems should be properly maintained. We must monitor the dashboard for P1, P2 alerts in the Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) file share system including SMB, NFS, objects, and blocks. Attention should be maintained for any alerts such as CPU, memory, and RAM alerts, as exceeding these creates issues within teams. If triggered to 95% and forgotten, it crosses the SLA breach, causing disturbances to application, web, and platform teams. Continuous monitoring on the Nutanix dashboard is essential. Even a highly experienced person in Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) cannot provide a 10 rating out of 10 because it is a vast system. I would rate it eight from my perspective.

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

"It helps simplify our storage, because the user interface is very simple and the installation is easy."

"What I like best about Pure Storage FlashBlade is its object storage functionality, plus it has fast underlying hardware. Pure Storage FlashBlade is also very stable. I find its stability one of its valuable features."

"It's very easy-to-use."

"We have seen a reduction in the total cost of ownership by around 20%."

"FlashBlade offers low latency, high throughput, and seamless scalability."

"The main feature I have found to be product replication."

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

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

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"What I found to be the most valuable features were better performance and uptime."

"The biggest advantage we find with Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) is the performance, due to it being hyper-converged and using all-flash nodes. The storage is very responsive, and it's significantly easier to manage from the Nutanix Files platform that comes along with NUS Pro."

"Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) is very scalable."

"The most valuable feature of Nutanix Unified Storage is SMB file sharing."

"We have virtually zero downtime with Nutanix. It updates itself, and we can easily move machines from one cluster to another."

"The biggest return on investment for me when using Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) is the management aspect since it's easier to manage."

"The most valuable features of the solution are high availability and synchronization to another location."

"It is unified. This is the best thing that Nutanix gave to the world. You can do everything from one point."

More Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) pros

"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."

"Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well."

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

"Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest."

"Replicated and erasure coded pools have allowed for multiple copies to be kept, easy scale-out of additional nodes, and easy replacement of failed hard drives. The solution continues working even when there are errors."

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

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

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"Its configuration should be easier."

"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."

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

"Its configuration should be easier."

"I would like to see better integration."

"The features provided for SMB customers are limited."

"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."

"The documentational aspect of FlashBlade needs improvement."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"It is challenging to configure access control settings."

"It could be more user-friendly."

"I would them to have more communication with other platforms, and it appears they are already doing that."

"I would like to see the integration of artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies. That could definitely be a major breakthrough in providing a unified, seamless experience for end-users. It could reduce costs as well as human effort."

"Allowing the use of the Gflag compromises the integrity of the Nutanix system and its established standards."

"There is some confusion in the reporting when I have to create the report for statistics. I find it is not so user-friendly."

"We couldn't access Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) from Prism Central due to bugs. The bugs that Nutanix fixed in newer versions prevented us from accessing Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) from Prism Central."

"The interface could be improved."

More Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) cons

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

"We have encountered slight integration issues."

"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."

"If troubleshooting is needed, the response should be faster."

"It needs a better UI for easier installation and management."

"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."

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

"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"The price is a little high."

"I rate the tool's pricing a seven to eight out of ten."

"The product is very expensive."

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

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

"Our licensing is renewed annually."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"Nutanix Unified Storage pricing is reasonable."

"Nutanix is very competitive."

"It's definitely a lot cheaper than buying a new EMC array. We bought a five-year commitment on all the hardware and software. I don't know what the cost was back then, but I do remember it was cheaper."

"It's competitive and attractive for moving things to it and then prioritizing those newly freed up resources for something else."

"For clients running Nutanix, the licensing cost for Files is a small add-on cost."

"It is quite expensive otherwise as it comes with three-tier peer underlying hardware."

"The price of the license is expensive when comparing it to traditional storage."

"Nutanix Unified Storage isn't expensive."

More Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) pricing and cost advice

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

"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."

"We never used the paid support."

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

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

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

872,008 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

27%

Manufacturing Company

Educational Organization

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	21

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	27
Midsize Enterprise	30
Large Enterprise	63

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

What do you like most about Nutanix Unified Storage?

Nutanix has excellent product documentation available on their portals, written in simple, easy-to-understand language.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Nutanix Unified Storage?

It is very cost-effective compared to the traditional environment. With new hardware, it's a long-term investment but...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Nutanix Unified Storage?

To improve Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS), cost is always an issue for every company, especially when we talk about la...

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 19% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 7% of the time

Scality RING vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 2% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 11% of the time

Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 10% of the time

MinIO vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 8% of the time

Amazon S3 vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 6% of the time

IBM Storage Fusion vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 4% of the time

More Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 41% of the time

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 ObjectScale vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 2% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

October 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

October 2025

Download Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

October 2025

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

Nutanix Files Storage, Nutanix Volumes Block Storage, Nutanix Objects Storage

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

Nutanix Unified Storage provides high availability and seamless cloud platform integration, ensuring robust redundancy, scalability, and streamlined management. It supports hybrid cloud connectivity, enhancing storage security and performance.

Nutanix Unified Storage is designed for effective data protection across block, file, and object storage, offering features like ransomware detection and a centralized management interface through Prism Central. Users gain improved SLAs and IT cost savings through its efficient performance. Despite its user-friendly interface, there is a demand for enhanced security measures such as Multi-Factor Authentication and DLP. While its resilience is notable, users seek improvements in protocol compatibility, storage capabilities, pricing, and support processes.

What are the most important features of Nutanix Unified Storage?

User-Friendly Interface: Simplifies storage management and monitoring.
High Availability: Ensures continuous operation and reliability.
Seamless Cloud Integration: Compatible with platforms like Azure and AWS.
Robust Redundancy: Protects data against hardware failures.
Scalable Architecture: Easily adapts to growing data storage needs.
Ransomware Detection: Enhances data protection measures.

What benefits and ROI might users find in reviews?

Improved SLAs: Increased service reliability and performance.
IT Cost Savings: Reduces expenses through efficient resource use.
Enhanced Security: Stronger data protection and reduced risk.
Centralized Management: Easier control and monitoring from one dashboard.

Industries implement Nutanix Unified Storage for tasks such as file storage, database performance improvement, and storage solution consolidation. Companies deploying virtual machines, securing against ransomware, connecting hybrid clouds, and backing up data find it useful. It supports workloads like Citrix VDI, Kubernetes, and research data, assisting many organizations migrating from legacy storage for better cost efficiency and reduced data center footprints.

Nutanix

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

JetBlue, International Speedway Corporation, Volkswagen SAIC, Brighton and Hove City Council, Foresters Financial, Janus International Group, Cloud Comrade, Serco

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

September 2025

Free Report: Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

Find out what your peers are saying about Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

872,008 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.

See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors and best File and Object Storage vendors.

We monitor all Software Defined Storage (SDS) 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.