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 #20, while Red Hat is ranked #3 with an average rating of 9.3. Hewlett Packard Enterprise holds a 2.2% mindshare in SDS, compared to Red Hat’s 14.3% 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: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

HPE StoreVirtual vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

January 2026

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 Software Defined Storage (SDS) category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 3.3%, down from 4.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HPE StoreVirtual is 2.2%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 14.3%, down from 21.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Software Defined Storage (SDS) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage	14.3%
Pure Storage FlashBlade	3.3%
HPE StoreVirtual	2.2%
Other	80.2%

Software Defined Storage (SDS)

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

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 is very easy to use, and it is very fast."

"The initial setup was straightforward. If you know how to plug in power and network you're pretty much qualified. They were on site to configure the network, the box to fit into our network architecture. Other than that, we self-managed from there."

"It has also helped to simplify storage for us in the way that it's easy to manage. Their automatic monitoring really helps when things break or are about to break. They see a problem coming and alert us even before our own system does."

"Pure Storage FlashBlade is user-friendly. It's replication feature is great because it has active replication and active DR. That's the beauty of the product. It's a perfect solution for block storage."

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

"We can capacity plan at a greater level than we used to."

"It performs well and it is also very fast."

"We have integrated it with VMware. The integration process is pretty good. Especially with VMware, it helps with the capacity of it."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"HPE StoreVirtual is very easy to use from the management console."

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

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

"The seamlessness behind the scenes of block management."

"It's very stable and it's easy to use."

"A company can scale it easily."

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

"Data is stored in two different places, leveraging more security and availability. Therefore, network problems are having less affect on iSCSI."

More HPE StoreVirtual pros

"It's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability."

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

"Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."

"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."

"Ceph has simplified my storage integration. I no longer need two or three storage systems, as Ceph can support all my storage needs. I no longer need OpenStack Swift for REST object storage access, I no longer need NFS or GlusterFS for filesystem sharing, and most importantly, I no longer need LVM or DRBD for my virtual machines in OpenStack."

"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."

"We have not encountered any stability issues for the product."

"We use the solution for cloud storage."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"Commvault has mainly driven the Analytics, providing data and reports. However, the product has room for improvement, especially regarding storage analytics. Upgrading firmware has caused issues, requiring feature disabling to revert to traditional backups. The firmware upgrades sometimes affect Commvault backups."

"I want efficiency. FlashBlade doesn't have efficiency now."

"We initially encountered challenges with the assembly process due to issues with the documentation required during setup, an area where Pure Storage needs improvement."

"The feature that we're waiting on is better integration with the cell services."

"I would like to see more monitoring capability included in the next release of this solution."

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

"We haven't been able to use much of the cloud area of Pure Storage. We have a storage server and it would be better if it could integrate with other cloud features of this solution."

"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."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"It is a costly solution."

"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."

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

"The product is coming to end-of-life in the next three years."

"The initial setup could be simplified to make it easier for new users."

"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."

"It would be nice if there were more parts available in Brazil and HPE could swap out faulty equipment quicker."

"The penalty for the availability is performance. So, you have to balance or choose between the availability and the performance."

More HPE StoreVirtual cons

"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."

"It would be nice to have a notification feature whenever an important action is completed."

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

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

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

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

"When it comes to the capabilities of Red Hat Ceph Storage such as object, block, and file storage, I am not fully satisfied."

"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is a little high."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"Our licensing is renewed annually."

"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."

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

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

"The pricing for FlashBlade is between cheap and moderate."

"I understand that it is competitively priced compared to other brands."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

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

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

"We never used the paid support."

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

"Most of time, you can get Ceph with the OpenStack solution in a subscription as a bundle."

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

"There is no cost for software."

"The other big advantage is that Ceph is free software. Compared to traditional SAN based storage, it is very economical."

"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."

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

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

14%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Media Company

11%

Performing Arts

10%

Computer Software Company

15%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

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	19
Midsize Enterprise	15
Large Enterprise	19

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	13
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	15

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

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 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

Dell ObjectScale vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 6% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

DataCore SANsymphony vs HPE StoreVirtual

Compared 18% of the time

StarWind Virtual SAN vs HPE StoreVirtual

Compared 13% of the time

Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) vs HPE StoreVirtual

Compared 13% of the time

Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs HPE StoreVirtual

Compared 13% of the time

IBM Spectrum Virtualize vs HPE StoreVirtual

Compared 10% of the time

More HPE StoreVirtual Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 48% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

Dell PowerFlex vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 2% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

January 2026

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

HPE StoreVirtual

January 2026

Download HPE StoreVirtual product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

January 2026

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

January 2026

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: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 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.