Quantum ActiveScale vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

Quantum and Red Hat are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. Quantum is ranked #24, while Red Hat is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.9. Quantum holds a 0.5% mindshare in FaOS, compared to Red Hat’s 17.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Quantum 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 Quantum ActiveScale are competing in the realm of enterprise storage solutions. Quantum ActiveScale appears to have an advantage due to its specialized data protection and seamless cloud integration, which are highly valued in advanced data environments.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage provides an open-source distributed storage architecture, flexibility, and scalability for various organizational needs. Quantum ActiveScale offers comprehensive data protection, cloud-ready infrastructure, and robust data resilience, making it suitable for businesses needing advanced data capabilities.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Quantum ActiveScale allows for a streamlined deployment process with dedicated customer support to ensure efficient setup. Red Hat Ceph Storage, while adaptable, may require more expertise and extended setup time, especially for organizations with limited IT resources.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage offers a lower cost of entry and potential ROI improvements thanks to its open-source community and scalability. Quantum ActiveScale, despite higher initial costs, offers better long-term ROI through superior data management and security features, justifying its premium price for enterprises with specific requirements.

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

Buyer's Guide

Quantum ActiveScale vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,484 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 August 2025, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.8%, down from 6.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Quantum ActiveScale is 0.5%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 17.8%, down from 22.4% 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

Frank Lai

Architecture Department at Supermicro Computer

Good performance and reliable but the setup is complex

We would like to see a self-sufficient installation. Nowadays it's open-source, but the installation is still tied to the vendor, which means it is unlikely that it is going to scale. I want them to tap into the broader community. It is really emerging, they have a year over year, 50% annual growth. With a 10-year-old company, it will certainly bring a lot of interest, and will certainly make it more successful, if they tap into that growing customer base. They have to make themselves relevant to the industry. The industry is totally geared to the Cloud, DevOps, and geared for agility. The software with the appliance in my set is already outdated, and it is not that it cannot sell, but it has to be tapping into the emerging and growing sectors to continue with the customers and businesses. This is what the requirement is, to improve their technology. Which means that they have to make themselves relevant to the industry.

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."

"The most valuable feature is Safe Mode."

"The most valuable features of this solution are the rewrite speed and the nonstop services."

"The most valuable features are the Metro clustering, and disaster recovery."

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

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

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

"The onboarding and integrated monitoring tools are pretty good."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"The technology is stable which is good."

"Workflow is easy to manage and maintain."

"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."

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

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

"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."

"Most valuable features include replication and compression."

"Data redundancy is a key feature, since it can survive failures (disks/servers). We didn’t lose our data or have a service interruption during server/disk failures."

"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."

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

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

"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."

"Recently, while upgrading the version code, one of the controllers failed. Replacing the controller took between 14 to 20 days."

"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."

"In terms of scalability, it doesn't expand out quite as robustly as some of the others, but it covers 90% of the market in what it does."

"The speed could be improved."

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

"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

"Lacks some ability to integrate with different systems."

"We would like to see a self-sufficient installation."

"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."

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

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

"Routing around slow hardware."

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

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

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

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is very expensive."

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

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

"The price is a little high."

"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 price of this solution could be made more affordable."

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

"Our licensing is renewed annually."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"Quantum ActiveScale is open-source."

"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."

"There is no cost for software."

"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."

"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."

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

865,484 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

13%

University

Educational Organization

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 9% of the time

Dell ECS vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 5% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Quantum ActiveScale

Compared 43% of the time

Dell ECS vs Quantum ActiveScale

Compared 30% of the time

Qumulo vs Quantum ActiveScale

Compared 26% of the time

More Quantum ActiveScale Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 39% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 6% 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

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

File and Object Storage

August 2025

Download Quantum ActiveScale product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

August 2025

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

ActiveScale, Quantum ActiveScale Object Storage, ActiveScale Object 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

StorNext File System
Increase productivity and reduce time to critical business insights with StorNext® File System. StorNext architecture delivers the necessary performance to get your business moving forward.

Quantum

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

Quantum ActiveScale vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

July 2025

Free Report: Quantum ActiveScale vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,484 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Quantum ActiveScale 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.