Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo

Top 10 Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Alternatives

Vendor: Microsoft
3.8 out of 5
Leave a review

Top Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include Red Hat Ceph Storage, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), and StarWind Virtual SAN. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions. Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct surpasses its competitors by offering robust scalability and high performance through its integrated software-defined storage features, seamless hardware integration, and cost-efficiency, ensuring optimal data management and resiliency for enterprises.

Microsoft Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Microsoft, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
Red Hat Ceph Storage
4.2 out of 5
Red Hat Ceph Storage offers scalability and open-source flexibility, appealing to those valuing customization. In comparison, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct attracts users with its seamless Windows Server integration, ideal for environments prioritizing ease of deployment and management within a Windows-centric infrastructure.
Download Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report
Red Hat Ceph Storage features straightforward setup costs, while Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct offers a more complex initial investment. The cost-effective installation of Ceph contrasts with the potentially higher expense of configuring Storage Spaces Direct.
View comparison
Pricing
Red Hat Ceph Storage features straightforward setup costs, while Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct offers a more complex initial investment. The cost-effective installation of Ceph contrasts with the potentially higher expense of configuring Storage Spaces Direct.
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI)
4.3 out of 5
Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure offers seamless scalability with high availability and flexibility across cloud environments. In comparison, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct provides strong redundancy and performance. NCI emphasizes easy management, while Microsoft focuses on cost-effective solutions with bundled licensing.
Download Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs. Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) Report
Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure setup costs are typically higher, reflecting its comprehensive feature set and scalability, while Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct offers a more cost-effective setup, appealing to businesses focused on budget constraints without sacrificing essential capabili...
View comparison
Pricing
Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure setup costs are typically higher, reflecting its comprehensive feature set and scalability, while Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct offers a more cost-effective setup, appealing to businesses focused on budget constraints without sacrificing essential capabili...
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
StarWind Virtual SAN
4.8 out of 5
StarWind Virtual SAN is favored for its user-friendly deployment, cost-effectiveness, and excellent customer support, appealing to businesses seeking easy integration. In comparison, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct offers high performance and robust integration with Windows Server, ideal for Microsoft-centric environments despite higher costs.
Download Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs. StarWind Virtual SAN Report
StarWind Virtual SAN is highlighted for its lower setup costs compared to Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct. Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct is noted for having higher initial expenses, offering different value trade-offs in pricing and implementation.
View comparison
Pricing
StarWind Virtual SAN is highlighted for its lower setup costs compared to Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct. Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct is noted for having higher initial expenses, offering different value trade-offs in pricing and implementation.
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)
4.4 out of 5
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct attracts tech buyers seeking cost-efficiency and straightforward support. In comparison, Nutanix Unified Storage offers versatility through extensive features and seamless integration. Microsoft focuses on simplicity and cost-effectiveness, while Nutanix caters to complex environments with robust performance and integration capabilities.
Download Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs. Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) Report
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct generally incurs lower setup costs compared to Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS), highlighting a cost-effective edge in initial deployment.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct generally incurs lower setup costs compared to Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS), highlighting a cost-effective edge in initial deployment.
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
DataCore SANsymphony
4.6 out of 5
DataCore SANsymphony offers flexibility and advanced features suitable for diverse and complex environments. In comparison, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct provides cost-effective solutions integrated within Windows Server, known for performance and ease of use, appealing to organizations utilizing Windows-specific infrastructure.
Download DataCore SANsymphony vs. Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Report
DataCore SANsymphony offers a lower setup cost compared to Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, making it a cost-effective option. However, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct provides greater scalability, appealing to enterprises with growing storage needs.
View comparison
Pricing
DataCore SANsymphony offers a lower setup cost compared to Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, making it a cost-effective option. However, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct provides greater scalability, appealing to enterprises with growing storage needs.
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
StorMagic SvSAN
4.3 out of 5
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
StorMagic SvSAN
4.3 out of 5
StorMagic SvSAN appeals to small businesses with its affordability and ease of use. In comparison, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct offers advanced integration with Windows Server, appealing to enterprises needing extensive scalability and functionality despite higher costs.
Download Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs. StorMagic SvSAN Report
StorMagic SvSAN's setup cost is lower, providing a budget-friendly option, whereas Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct incurs a higher initial expense, reflecting its advanced feature set.
View comparison
Pricing
StorMagic SvSAN's setup cost is lower, providing a budget-friendly option, whereas Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct incurs a higher initial expense, reflecting its advanced feature set.
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
IBM Spectrum Scale
4.3 out of 5
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
IBM Spectrum Scale
4.3 out of 5
IBM Spectrum Scale is preferred for high-performance computing with its parallel file system and scalability. In comparison, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct is ideal for enterprises with Microsoft infrastructure, offering integrated virtualization within hyper-converged solutions that enhance cost efficiency and deployment simplicity.
Download IBM Spectrum Scale vs. Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Report
IBM Spectrum Scale has higher setup costs, while Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct is generally less expensive to initiate.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Spectrum Scale has higher setup costs, while Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct is generally less expensive to initiate.
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
Red Hat Gluster Storage
4.1 out of 5
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct appeals for its Windows Server integration and comprehensive support, making it ideal for enterprises seeking streamlined management. In comparison, Red Hat Gluster Storage is favored for its scalability and cost-effectiveness, perfect for open-source environments prioritizing flexibility and hardware compatibility.
Download Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs. Red Hat Gluster Storage Report
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct incurs higher setup costs compared to Red Hat Gluster Storage, which provides a more economical initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct incurs higher setup costs compared to Red Hat Gluster Storage, which provides a more economical initial investment.
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
HPE StoreVirtual
4.1 out of 5
Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Logo
HPE StoreVirtual
4.1 out of 5
HPE StoreVirtual appeals with its hardware integration and efficient management of virtual workloads. In comparison, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct offers advanced data storage features and performance flexibility. Tech buyers choose StoreVirtual for affordability, while others prefer Storage Spaces Direct for its robust capabilities.
Download HPE StoreVirtual vs. Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct Report
HPE StoreVirtual typically has a lower initial setup cost, while Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct may involve higher setup expenses due to additional hardware requirements. This difference is crucial for budget-conscious organizations assessing deployment costs.
View comparison
Pricing
HPE StoreVirtual typically has a lower initial setup cost, while Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct may involve higher setup expenses due to additional hardware requirements. This difference is crucial for budget-conscious organizations assessing deployment costs.

Related categories

Software Defined Storage (SDS)
File and Object Storage
HCI