No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Tintri VMstore T7000 comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Everpure FlashArray
Sponsored
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
231
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (2nd)
Red Hat Ceph Storage
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined Storage (SDS) (3rd), File and Object Storage (2nd)
Tintri VMstore T7000
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
66
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Software Defined Storage (SDS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage10.2%
DataCore SANsymphony6.6%
Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI)6.3%
Other76.9%
Software Defined Storage (SDS)
All-Flash Storage Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tintri VMstore T70001.7%
Dell PowerStore9.6%
NetApp AFF7.6%
Other81.1%
All-Flash Storage
 

Featured Reviews

Sowjanya MV - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at Wipro Limited
Has improved performance for mission-critical workloads and enabled seamless non-disruptive upgrades
The availability is 99.99%, which is the main factor any customer would need because their data should be available whenever they want to access it. This is one main critical thing. It is very easy to upgrade since Pure Storage FlashArray handles it well. Everything is non-disruptive now; previously, there were forklift shifts, but now that is not the case. Pure Storage FlashArray says no to forklift upgrades. Usually hardware requires downtime, but Pure Storage FlashArray has improved their footprint so that they are not asking for downtime; everything is just a non-disruptive activity, which is why customers are more inclined towards Pure Storage FlashArray. Customers want more of the models in their environment due to the performance they are giving, and everything is in one Pure1 Array console where we can view all the models on one page or just an orchestration tool. You don't miss anything; you have replication, notifications about replication, and details about which host groups replication is happening in and if that replication is successful or failed. On a daily basis, our purpose is to create volumes for infrastructure; our daily activities include creating volumes and mapping them to the host, doing any migrations from a VM, clearing the data stores, and carving the volumes to those VMs. One key factor is the data compression with a ratio of 5:1, focusing on space efficiency, inline deduplication, and the compression Pure Storage FlashArray works on; that is a major factor we can suggest to any customer. Analytical capabilities are crucial. Daily, we check the throughput and consumption, and Pure Storage FlashArray provides predictions for one year regarding usage. This prediction helps plan updates well ahead. For support, we just raise a case, and they follow up and get it done. There is also AI readiness, but with the model R2, we don't have much of that AI readiness. For others, we do have AI readiness that predicts capacity based on daily or monthly trends, enabling us to analyze how much space we need or if we need to expand the disk shelf. From an operational point of view, a good feature is that if you accidentally delete a volume, it will be retained in the destroyed state for the next twenty-four hours, which is not the same with any other vendor. I have worked in this storage domain for the past fifteen years, and this option is remarkable, benefiting any L1 or L2 engineer. Additionally, from a compliance perspective, Pure Storage FlashArray has REST APIs enabled. I have not explored automation much, but from a security standpoint, it is strong with encryption data. If you want to automate, you can easily integrate with all clouds and explore Pure Cloud for scheduling workloads, including volume creation. Customers find benefit in Pure Storage FlashArray's single management pane of glass due to the dual controller and active-active setup. If one of the controllers goes down, all workloads automatically shift to the other controller, ensuring their data is safe and accessible at all times. This is a highlighted feature that any customer desires because their data should always be accessible. For SAN workloads, we use Pure Storage FlashArray because for SAN FC fiber channel, we don't use it; we use NetApp for NAS activities. We have clearly split this, so SAN is for mission-critical applications, while network-attached storage handles file systems. This architecture helps us maximize the benefit from Pure Storage FlashArray due to the significant workloads from this giant retail client. From a footprint and energy consumption perspective, you can see energy consumption from the Pure1 storage portal on a daily basis, and it is very compact. The three models we use consume only three units, which is quite low. From a footprint and data center perspective, it doesn't occupy much space. As everything moves to cloud, there are requirements to avoid excess spending on data centers, and Pure Storage FlashArray is efficient in energy consumption and is environmentally friendly.
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.
Tanesh Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Storage And Server Farm (Ucs) Administrator at Meezan Bank Limited
Vm-aware storage has simplified vmware management and delivers strong deduplication and savings
There are many good features for Tintri VMstore T7000, especially its nature of understanding VMware. It is VM-aware storage, which is a very good characteristic. When any VM is moved from one host to another host, there is no way to see where it is running. It is very smooth in action. Trintri VMstore T7000 is totally autonomous. We have integrated it with our virtualization environment, so all the VMs and machines running in our environment move between one Tintri VMstore T7000 and another without requiring any manual intervention. The system can schedule resources from its own capabilities. If one Tintri VMstore T7000 becomes full, the machine will be moved to another automatically. This autonomous system is very beneficial. Nowadays, all storage comes with NVMe flash and all storage is coming with flash storages as well. Tintri VMstore T7000 is much easier to handle. We just need to integrate the whole Tintri VMstore T7000 with vCenter and all the work will be done by vCenter. If we want to check what the deduplication will be, there is a really good feature of Tintri VMstore T7000 called TGC. We can integrate all Tintri VMstore T7000 systems from one end and manage all of them from a single endpoint. The major benefit of using Tintri VMstore T7000 is its deduplication and compression ratio, which is around 4x to 5x. No other storage is giving that much ratio. This is really good and much cost-saving for the company. Administrative cost is reduced because Tintri VMstore T7000 gives us a single point where we can manage it. This is both time-saving and cost-saving.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The support team is available all the time and they seem to know what they are doing."
"Data deduplication is one feature I found to be the most valuable in the tool...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The GUI is very easy to use and intuitive."
"It has simplified our storage."
"Very stable; no worries about how much it can handle."
"I would recommend Pure Storage, as it is well-established."
"The support has been very good from Pure Storage FlashArray."
"It overperforms both in terms of storage capacity and throughput, and bandwidth capability."
"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, and the solution continues working even when there are errors."
"Most valuable features include replication and compression."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"The configuration of the solution and the user interface are both quite good."
"I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product."
"The product spawned a new vision of storage deployment, as well as a strong interest in reusing equipment and increasing ROI."
"We are using Ceph internal inexpensive disk and data redundancy without spending extra money on external storage."
"The community support is very good."
"You can ask for a deployment test with Tintri, and after you test it you will like it, its deployment is really quick and simple, and no other dashboard is needed because you can see the behavior of your storage and the IO performance at the VM level."
"We have increased responsiveness because the smart caching in VMStore allows us to achieve flash like performance for the VDI environment because mostly the same data is accessed."
"We also find the detail per-vm reporting at the ability to see reports from the hypervisor straight back to the storage useful."
"I like Tintri's Global Admin feature and the solution's performance. It's incredibly fast storage, which was a significant upgrade for us when we deployed it seven years ago. The Tintri snapshots are brilliant and incredibly reliable."
"Immediately upon installation we benefited from a 5x speed/performance increase in the overall system for all of our VMs migrated to the unit from an old unreliable Synology storage unit."
"The ease and use and the great performance are why we went with our 2nd Tintri VMstore."
"The management dashboards keep improving and allow for quick and easy tracing of issues."
"The Deduplication feature in VDI environments. If Tintri says we can host 3000 VMs in our storage, I know we can host 3000 VMs there. Believe the results."
 

Cons

"I would love for them to have a hyper-converged solution."
"It would be nice if Pure had something in its portfolio that provided higher deduplication and compression for backups."
"We haven't seen ROI."
"I would like to see some improvements on the FlashBlade side around the CIFS space support. I am not super familiar with all the different NAS protocols that they run on their box, but there could be some improvements made on SMB CIFS side."
"Pure will probably have to move to other layers of the stack, not only storage but, maybe, hyperconverged."
"I find the pricing of Everpure FlashArray to be quite high compared to other storage solutions; however, the reliability and features are commendable."
"They need to find another way of doing data protection, RAID is not working very well."
"Many high-end platforms from other vendors like Dell EMC or Hitachi, their backend has Active/Active architecture, unlike Pure Storage FlashArray which doesn't utilize an Active/Active architecture on the backend."
"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."
"This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing."
"Ceph Storage lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication. That is a huge loss in terms of performance."
"I've heard the integration with OpenShift is great, however, the licensing cost is excessively high."
"Routing around slow hardware."
"If troubleshooting is needed, the response should be faster."
"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."
"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."
"I think with the world soon becoming only SSD, possibly NVMe, and 3D Xpoint. It would make sense for Tintri to drop the hybrid array down the line."
"It would be beneficial if Tintri could identify issues through telemetry and notify us before we need to contact them."
"It needs current RHEV-M support (v2.5) which is slated for 2016."
"Integration of all the interfaces: For each Tintri For the global centre management Analytics The interfaces are all great, but if all the functionality were built into one global centre, this would make the interface a single pane."
"VMstore as a product is an appliance. It is normal hardware. When there are new releases of, for instance, VMware vSphere, it can sometimes take time on the Tintri side to support that. It can take longer than expected. Tintri could improve by ensuring shorter times for support and compatibility when there are new releases from partners like VMware or Microsoft."
"The Hyper-V configuration is not as easy as VMware."
"When Tintri gets to either the maximum performance reserves or available disk space, the only upgrade path is to purchase a new unit."
"Active/active cluster between two Tintris on Hyper-V cluster. Dedup should be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think that the pricing is less expensive compared to other standard products in the market today. Even the support contract and maintenance services cost less when compared to market-leading products like EMC."
"Pure Storage is all-flash, so this sometimes tends to make it a bit more expensive in the beginning."
"The price is very reasonable when compared to other solutions."
"There are no licensing fees aside from the support."
"It is a cheaper solution."
"We have a seen a reduction in TCO. It is definitely a cost-effective solution for us. We have seen ROI."
"The price-to-performance is good. I looked at Pure about three to four years back, but the price-to-performance wasn't right for us. Now, it's right."
"It is cheaper than NetApp."
"The other big advantage is that Ceph is free software. Compared to traditional SAN based storage, it is very economical."
"The price of this product isn't high."
"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."
"Most of time, you can get Ceph with the OpenStack solution in a subscription​​ as a bundle.​"
"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."
"The area it needs to improve is the pricing. It could be better."
"It is fairly priced, but it is very important to consider the total cost of ownership over time. The solution has excellent compression and deduplication capabilities, often offering up to three times the raw capacity."
"Always could be cheaper."
"The cost of all the SW is well spent because it makes you save on backup and DR."
"What I have heard, price-wise, is that Tinti was definitely very competitive. That's one of the reasons it was chosen for us."
"It's very competitive."
"Make sure that you have all licenses in one go. Options afterwards can cost extra."
"The price of Tintri VMstore is not overly high compared to similar solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions are best for your needs.
904,836 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
10%
Computer Software Company
6%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business71
Midsize Enterprise38
Large Enterprise159
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise27
Large Enterprise21
 

Questions from the Community

Which should I choose: HPE 3PAR StoreServ or Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series?
Both are great platforms, but if you are considering all flash solutions, I would recommend you to consider Pure Stor...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashArray?
I have knowledge about the licensing part, which we obtained for around 10 years from the time of deployment, but I d...
What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashArray?
I believe we have covered the most important features; the architecture of Pure Storage is essential, and features su...
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 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...
What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat Ceph Storage?
I do not have experience working with solutions such as Red Hat Ceph Storage and StorPool. I have plenty of experienc...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tintri VMstore?
The pricing of Tintri VMstore T7000 is cost-efficient. It is pretty costly as all IT investments in infrastructure ar...
What needs improvement with Tintri VMstore?
Good documentation is an improvement point. One concern I have with Tintri VMstore T7000, and in general, people are ...
What is your primary use case for Tintri VMstore?
My use cases for Tintri VMstore T7000 involve virtualization and everything automation. It is a good fit because you ...
 

Also Known As

Pure Storage FlashArray
Ceph
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
Dell, DreamHost
That’s why leading enterprises including Comcast, Chevron, NASA, Toyota, United Healthcare and 20% of the Fortune 100, trust Tintri with storage needs.
Find out what your peers are saying about StarWind, Nutanix, Red Hat and others in Software Defined Storage (SDS). Updated: June 2026.
904,836 professionals have used our research since 2012.