Pure Storage FlashBlade vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

Pure Storage and Red Hat are both solutions in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category. Pure Storage is ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.8, while Red Hat is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.8. Pure Storage holds a 3.8% mindshare in SDS, compared to Red Hat’s 18.1% mindshare. Additionally, 95% of Pure Storage users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 82% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Pure Storage FlashBlade

Read 39 Pure Storage FlashBlade reviews

4,991 Views
749 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

Red Hat Ceph Storage

Read 27 Red Hat Ceph Storage reviews

13,826 Views
3,042 Comparison Views

82% willing to recommend

Pure Storage FlashBlade

Red Hat Ceph Storage

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Red Hat Ceph Storage and Pure Storage FlashBlade are competing in the storage solutions category. Pure Storage FlashBlade appears to have the upper hand due to its superior speed and advanced features, making it ideal for performance-centric needs.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage offers scalability, flexibility, and a wide range of use cases due to its open-source nature. It seamlessly integrates with cloud infrastructures and adapts to commodity hardware, providing scalable block and object storage from a single platform. Pure Storage FlashBlade provides exceptional speed, swift data handling, and advanced analytics capabilities. It excels with high throughput and reliable performance, offering seamless data snapshots and replication.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage can enhance its user interface, streamline integration processes for those outside the Red Hat ecosystem, and simplify its deployment strategy to broaden its adoption. Pure Storage FlashBlade could improve by reducing its reliance on specific hardware, offering more cost-effective options for smaller businesses, and enhancing its data redundancy features to match industry-leading standards.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat Ceph Storage has a complex deployment due to its open-source framework, requiring skilled resources for management. In contrast, Pure Storage FlashBlade offers a straightforward deployment process, supported by comprehensive customer service, leading to a smoother implementation and better user satisfaction.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage is favored for its lower initial costs, presenting a cost-effective solution for businesses focusing on scalability without incurring excessive expenses. Conversely, Pure Storage FlashBlade involves higher upfront costs but offers significant ROI through enhanced performance and efficiency, making it an appealing choice for enterprises requiring high data processing capabilities.

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

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 873,085 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

Ranking in Software Defined Storage (SDS)

8th

Ranking in File and Object Storage

8th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

All-Flash Storage (16th)

Red Hat Ceph Storage

Ranking in Software Defined Storage (SDS)

2nd

Ranking in File and Object Storage

1st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2025, in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 3.8%, down from 4.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 18.1%, down from 20.9% 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	18.1%
Pure Storage FlashBlade	3.8%
Other	78.1%

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

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 most valuable feature is Safe Mode."

"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."

"Pure Storage FlashBlade's scalability is one of the most valuable features, and importantly, it always works, allowing for seamless upgrades."

"We can capacity plan at a greater level than we used to."

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

"I would rate this solution an eight plus. It has has good flexibility and stability, it's easy to manage and the response time is good."

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

"The tool's most valuable features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"Stratus allows more reliability than all the other types of computers available."

"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."

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

"It's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability."

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

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

"Most valuable features include replication and compression."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"The solution is expensive."

"I have not seen ROI."

"It's on the expensive side, as expected for a niche product."

"I would like to see more VM-Aware features in the next release of this solution."

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

"Commvault has mainly driven the Analytics, providing data and reports. However, the product has room for improvement, especially regarding storage analytics. Upgrading firmware has caused issues, requiring feature disabling to revert to traditional backups. The firmware upgrades sometimes affect Commvault backups."

"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."

"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."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

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

"The licensing cost is excessively high. This is a significant issue from my perspective."

"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."

"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."

"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."

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

"In the deployment step, we need to create some config files to add Ceph functions in OpenStack modules (Nova, Cinder, Glance). It would be useful to have a tool that validates the format of the data in those files, before generating a deploy with failures."

"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"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 could be cheaper."

"It's a costly solution, but Pure Storage FlashBlade doesn't require additional licenses. All of the software is combined into one bundle."

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

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

"Our licensing is renewed annually."

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

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"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."

"There is no cost for software."

"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."

"We never used the paid support."

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

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

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

873,085 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

18%

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	21

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 outages when we need to quickly move data between different data centers. It ensure...

See all answers

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 it good for us.

See all answers

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 and FlashBlade, allowing for synchronized data between both platforms.

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 solution allows for multiple copies of replicated and coded pools to be kept, ea...

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 the Stratus case, which is one of the most reliable systems available in the world...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 18% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 11% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 7% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 5% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 42% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 5% of the time

VMware vSAN 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 PowerFlex 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

Red Hat Ceph Storage

October 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

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

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

September 2025

Free Report: Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

873,085 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Pure Storage FlashBlade 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.