Hitachi Content Platform vs NetApp StorageGRID comparison

Hitachi Vantara and NetApp are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. Hitachi Vantara is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.0, while NetApp is ranked #9 with an average rating of 8.3. Hitachi Vantara holds a 1.6% mindshare in FaOS, compared to NetApp’s 5.1% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Hitachi Vantara users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of NetApp users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Hitachi Content Platform and NetApp StorageGRID compete in the object storage solutions category. Hitachi Content Platform seems to have the upper hand when pricing and support are key, offering a more streamlined setup and strong customer service. However, NetApp StorageGRID may appeal to organizations requiring advanced storage features due to its expansive capabilities.

Features: Hitachi Content Platform emphasizes data management with integrated search, analytics, data protection, and tiering. NetApp StorageGRID offers high scalability, strong integration with cloud services, and dynamic content storage management suitable for diverse environments.

Room for Improvement: Hitachi Content Platform could improve its cloud integration features and expand its support for different workload types. It may also enhance its scalability options to match larger infrastructures. NetApp StorageGRID might work on simplifying its configuration processes, improving ease of use without relying heavily on documentation, and providing more intuitive user interfaces.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: NetApp StorageGRID provides flexible deployment through multiple models and robust documentation, which can benefit complex infrastructures. Hitachi Content Platform simplifies deployment with detailed guidance and intuitive configuration, supporting quick setups with efficient customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Hitachi Content Platform generally offers lower initial setup costs, presenting a cost-effective solution with a positive ROI due to efficient management features. In contrast, NetApp StorageGRID may require higher initial investments, but its advanced features and scalability can deliver significant long-term ROI for enterprises needing extensive data management capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed Hitachi Content Platform vs. NetApp StorageGRID Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Hitachi Content Platform vs. NetApp StorageGRID

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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 January 2026, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.3%, down from 6.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Hitachi Content Platform is 1.6%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp StorageGRID is 5.1%, down from 5.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Pure Storage FlashBlade	5.3%
NetApp StorageGRID	5.1%
Hitachi Content Platform	1.6%
Other	88.0%

File and Object Storage

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

Mir Gulzar Ahmed

IT Manager at Synergy Computers

Integrates well with existing systems but technical support for the platform needs improvement

While deployment is simple, it's not as simple as StorageGRID. The architecture is entirely different, even though the end product uses the same protocols. The user interface isn't as user-friendly, and the management platform UI isn't as intuitive as others. Deployment isn't as centralized either. Although I've deployed Hitachi Content myself in our production head office for the VM team, even though it's simple, it wasn't completely straightforward. They still required my help with the initial configuration environment setup. So, it's not just simple; there are some tricky aspects. The environment is tricky, but if you understand it, configuration can be done quickly.

Read full review

Michael Lopez

Sr Systems Engineer at a outsourcing company with 10,001+ employees

Has reduced storage costs and improved snapshot management for large data workloads

The advanced features of NetApp StorageGRID which our upper management wouldn't agree to use, include the S3 feature. We are heavy into AWS, and my thoughts were to develop a small dev environment or even a POC environment on-prem. That's still up in the air as we continue on. Currently, AI has taken over everything with a focus on AI. The upgrades of NetApp StorageGRID present a challenge. It's a rolling upgrade, node by node. At one point, one node would not upgrade. The positive aspect is that it didn't take down the entire environment. The environment remained functional on two different versions. The scalability of NetApp StorageGRID has been proven as we've expanded twice. We started with six or seven nodes and have grown to 15 nodes. It does take time for synchronization to complete. From what I've seen, it took a couple of months for it all to sync up once adding nodes. However, it was transparent. It captured the addition and performed effectively, all happening in the background, steadily and surely.

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 features of FlashBlade include its replication capabilities, reports, and easy allocation. Everything is user-friendly."

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

"The most valuable features include the ease of implementation, ease of use and the speed that you can do backup and recovery on."

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

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

"Speed and ease of use are the two most valuable features."

"Using this solution has made our backups more reliable."

"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."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"The platform helps in efficient data management with the ease of server provisioning."

"The Hitachi Content Platform is a stable and reliable solution."

"The most valuable features of the solution are the versioning and the ransomware protection."

"The main selling point is its compatibility with different environments. It functions like an on-prem Google Drive or Dropbox built on top of the object storage."

"Integrating Hitachi Content Platform with existing systems is not challenging."

"The product provides the fastest technology."

"The features that I have found most valuable are their retention logs. The other thing I have found most valuable is the way they handle the BHEA. Basically the DNS and everything is managed by itself. It is seamless to the users."

"The way that they handle the DR is very good because when there is a failover, it is seamless to the users."

Cons

"I would like to have Snapshots and Snapmail in the next release. People who came from a NetApp background, especially expect these features."

"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."

"On our dedupe during our initial buy, we were expecting a number a little higher like 4x. However, we are getting about 3.6. While it is close enough, it doesn't quite hit the numbers. So, this has been a challenge."

"The speed could be improved."

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

"There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."

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

"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."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"The user interface isn't as user-friendly, and the management platform UI isn't as intuitive as others. So it can be more user-friendly."

"There is room for improvement in the capacity for integration with other platforms."

"In terms of the customer support, I can say it's a mixed reaction depending on the country."

"The solution could use more integration with clouds."

"When you want to replace a disk, we need to start the maintenance from the S nodes. We have to automate maintenance so any onsite engineer can replace it after that, but we don't need to do this on VSP platforms. An engineer can come in and replace that specific disk. If also we could do that on Hitachi Content Platform, it would be great for us."

"At present, it is complicated to use the CLI command."

"Although they claim to provide NFS, the actual implementation requires an additional gateway, which makes it a costly solution."

"This product's ability to track logs for access still needs to be improved."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price could be cheaper."

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"The product is very expensive."

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

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

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"The product’s cost is average."

"The pricing could be better."

"Overall, it's costly."

"The price of the Hitachi Content Platform is very high."

"Hitachi is more expensive than StorageGRID."

"Pricing is comparable to other solutions in the market."

"I think the ROI for this solution is very good because the pricing for it is in between other solutions."

"The licensing that the S3 service provides them from a FabricPool standpoint is more attractive than the licensing from AWS or Azure."

"While we have been able to save money on storage costs, it could be better."

"It is very cost-effective."

"We save money on storage costs from this solution since it allows us to have a source of revenue from customers consuming the service."

"The pricing is quite flexible and depends on the specific customer requirements. The initial cost is primarily based on the desired capacity, so it's not a fixed price."

"Our licensing is in INR it was around 25 lakhs, which is roughly two million."

"We chose NetApp because of price and performance."

"I rate the product pricing around five out of ten—it's negotiable, depending on the circumstances."

More NetApp StorageGRID 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

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

22%

Financial Services Firm

20%

Government

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

20%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Computer Software Company

12%

University

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	4
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	4

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	11

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?

Regarding pricing, it is okay; we needed exactly this in size, and the price was a lot lower than competitors, making...

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Hitachi Content Platform?

Integrating Hitachi Content Platform with existing systems is not challenging.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Hitachi Content Platform?

In comparison to competitors like Huawei, which can use all storage protocols in the same platform, Hitachi Content P...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Hitachi Content Platform?

Mainly, from my project, Hitachi Content Platform is used for archiving. The customer is in banking, so they need to ...

See all answers

What do you like most about NetApp StorageGRID?

The management portals have most significantly improved our data retrieval times. They've made it much easier to rest...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp StorageGRID?

As an administrator, I was not involved in the pricing of NetApp StorageGRID. From what I understood, it was cheaper ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetApp StorageGRID?

The upgrades of NetApp StorageGRID present challenges. It's a rolling upgrade, node by node. At one point, one node w...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 18% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 9% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 9% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 7% of the time

Qumulo vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 3% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

MinIO vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 15% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 14% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 13% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 6% of the time

VAST Data vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 6% of the time

More Hitachi Content Platform Competitors

MinIO vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 22% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 20% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 17% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 6% of the time

VAST Data vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 3% of the time

More NetApp StorageGRID Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

January 2026

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

Hitachi Content Platform

January 2026

Download Hitachi Content Platform product report

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID

January 2026

Download NetApp StorageGRID product report

Also Known As

No data available

HCP, Hitachi Vantara Content Platform, Hitachi Vantara HCP

Storage GRID

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

Hitachi Content Platform is an object storage solution that enables IT organizations and cloud service providers to store, share, sync, protect, preserve, analyze and retrieve file data from a single system. It is more efficient, easier to use, and capable of handling much more data than traditional file storage solutions. HCP automates day-to-day IT operations like data protection and readily evolves to changes in scale, scope, applications, storage, server and cloud technologies over the life of data. In IT environements where data grows quickly or must live for years, decades or even indefinitely, these capabilities are invaluable.

Hitachi Vantara

Store and manage unstructured data at scale using NetApp StorageGRID for secure, durable object storage. Place content in the right location, at the right time, and on the right storage tier, optimizing workflows and reducing overall costs for globally distributed rich media.

NetApp

Sample Customers

ServiceNow, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Motorsport, Dominos, Man AHL

Rabobank, Xinhua News Agency, Kremsm'ller Industrieanlagenbau KG, KSC Commercial Internet, AIS Group, Shanghai Interactive Television Co. Ltd (SiTV), China Telecom, Spin Master

ASE, DARZ GmbH

Buyer's Guide

Hitachi Content Platform vs. NetApp StorageGRID

December 2025

Free Report: Hitachi Content Platform vs. NetApp StorageGRID

Find out what your peers are saying about Hitachi Content Platform vs. NetApp StorageGRID and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Hitachi Content Platform vs. NetApp StorageGRID 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.