HPE StoreVirtual vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Red Hat are both solutions in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category. Hewlett Packard Enterprise is ranked #21, while Red Hat is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.9. Hewlett Packard Enterprise holds a 1.3% mindshare in SDS, compared to Red Hat’s 20.0% mindshare. Additionally, 94% of Hewlett Packard Enterprise 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 Dec 5, 2024

Red Hat Ceph Storage and HPE StoreVirtual both compete in the enterprise storage solutions category. HPE StoreVirtual holds the upper hand with its advanced features that surpass Ceph Storage's offerings.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage offers scalable, flexible object, block, and file storage ideal for cloud infrastructures. It provides integration with enterprise environments and supports high availability and data redundancy. HPE StoreVirtual presents a rich feature set with advanced data management, synchronous replication, and flexible integrated solutions that enhance both performance and scalability. These features contribute to its perceived superiority in managing data efficiently.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage could improve on enhancing its feature set to better compete with more feature-rich offerings by adding more advanced data management capabilities. It could also work on refining user interface experience for easier management. HPE StoreVirtual may focus on simplifying its deployment process to match its robust features with user-friendly deployment. Additionally, offering more affordable pricing options may attract a broader customer base concerned with initial expenditures.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat Ceph Storage features a straightforward deployment process with strong customer support, easing the setup challenges. HPE StoreVirtual's deployment can be more complex but is compensated with comprehensive customer service, providing thorough assistance and reliable support post-deployment.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage stands out with cost-effective solutions offering a favorable ROI, appealing to budget-conscious businesses. HPE StoreVirtual justifies its higher initial setup cost with superior ROI stemming from enhanced performance and robust capabilities, making it a worthwhile investment for those seeking long-term benefits.

To learn more, read our detailed HPE StoreVirtual vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: May 2025).

Buyer's Guide

HPE StoreVirtual vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

May 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 860,592 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 July 2025, in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 4.2%, down from 4.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HPE StoreVirtual is 1.3%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 20.0%, down from 22.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Software Defined Storage (SDS)

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

Vebjorn Nergaard

Senior IT Engineer at Guard Automation AS

Reliable with helpful support and good replication

The setup is okay, however, it comes with a moderate amount of difficulty. If you are new to the product, it is difficult. You do get used to the process over time and it gets easier. A company just needs one person to maintain the solution as it just runs. You don't need any support staff. It's very, very hands-off except when you do updates. The product is living its own life.

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 initial setup is pretty quick."

"The main feature I have found to be product replication."

"The product is scalable and easy to expand."

"FlashBlade offers low latency, high throughput, and seamless scalability."

"It has absolutely simplified our storage because the dashboards on the consoles show a clear understanding of where you are, and it is also very easy to provision. This been a big help for our teams."

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

"The ease of deployment and management has helped us simplify our storage. We also do not have to worry about capacity management as much. A lot of these things are native to Pure Storage."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"Simplicity of not having to buy FC or FCoE SAN. Instead, we buy servers with their own storage."

"It appears to be very stable and very robust."

"The initial setup is straightforward, not a complex procedure."

"I guess on the top of the list is certainly ease of use."

"All of the administrative tasks are easy and everything is centralized."

"The solution's most valuable aspect is that it is hardware independent."

"he interface and the installation makes it easy as it's all in one piece of hardware and it doesn't need to be connected to anything else."

"The seamlessness behind the scenes of block management."

More HPE StoreVirtual pros

"The community support is very good."

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

"The scalability feature is used by all users and is critical for our operations."

"I really like that Red Hat Ceph Storage can be used as a total solution without any storage area network components."

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

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

"We are using Ceph internal inexpensive disk and data redundancy without spending extra money on external storage."

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"The solution is expensive."

"The speed could be improved."

"Its configuration should be easier."

"To improve FlashBlade, some analysts suggest enhancing its handling of relational database management systems and SQL queries."

"I would like to see more deduplication."

"It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release."

"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."

"It would be nice if you could store file-based in the same box with the same technology."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"One of the areas that need improvement is the consolidated management platform, to manage all of the nodes from one place and the licensing around that."

"User interface could be improved."

"Configuration of application integrated snapshots for VMware is convoluted and it did not work immediately."

"In our country, Qatar, most of the industry isn't using too much HP. StoreVirtual doesn't move fast. It's not a popular product."

"f you're doing the 10Gb adapters, SFPs don't come with it, but it doesn't say that. It might say that somewhere else, but it's not clear."

"The management aspect of the solution needs to be improved in order to make the product stronger."

"It is a costly solution."

"it would nice to have deduplication or compression, things that you have in some of the higher end products."

More HPE StoreVirtual cons

"Some documentation is very hard to find."

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

"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."

"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."

"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."

"Routing around slow hardware."

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

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"It is within reason for what you get. From what we have found comparing it to other vendors, it is in the same range as others. Given the choice, we would definitely redeploy it based on the cost."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

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

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

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

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"The prices are OK, so we don't have much difficulty selling HPE in Brazil."

"One of the key features about it is that when you buy either a VSA license or a StoreVirtual appliance, all your software's included."

"Licensing is not exactly straightforward, but not the worst I have ever seen."

"If you buy a five-year license, not only does the technical support expire after five years, but you also lose the ability to change and expand the VSA, and the systems won't go down."

"For our organization, I believe the cost is 16,000 Euros for a three-year license. It costs a bit more to do the maintenance on our servers as well. It's also on an HP ProLiant server and an organization will need to do the maintenance there also. I believe the price for that is around 2000 Euros a year."

"It costs less than $10,000 for one machine. If it costs more than 15% higher than this, then the customer may change to another solution."

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

"We never used the paid support."

"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."

"There is no cost for software."

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

"The price of this product isn't high."

"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."

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

860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

14%

Educational Organization

12%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

19%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

11%

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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 for FlashBlade is between cheap and moderate. FlashBlade is worth the money due to the experience and per...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?

Its configuration should be easier. There should be easier language for the configuration.

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 20% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 11% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray 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

VMware vSAN vs HPE StoreVirtual

Compared 52% of the time

More HPE StoreVirtual Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 37% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 6% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 6% of the time

Dell PowerFlex vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 4% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

June 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

HPE StoreVirtual

June 2025

Download HPE StoreVirtual product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

June 2025

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

HPE StoreVirtual, HPE VSA

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

HPE StoreVirtual storage ensures that organisations can optimise the benefits of server virtualisation with cost-effective high availability and disaster recovery. The iSCSI-based, scale-out storage platform is easy to manage and change – meeting ongoing business demands without creating IT bottlenecks or application downtime. Overcoming the cost and management limitations of traditional storage area networks (SANs), HPE StoreVirtual nodes use storage clustering to form a single pool of resources that enable organisations to buy only what they need today, scaling non-disruptively to meet requirements in the future.

Hewlett Packard Enterprise

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

NBrIX, WIND Telecom, Netrics

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

HPE StoreVirtual vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

May 2025

Free Report: HPE StoreVirtual vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

Find out what your peers are saying about HPE StoreVirtual vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our HPE StoreVirtual vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.

See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) 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.