MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

MinIO and Red Hat are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. MinIO is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0, while Red Hat is ranked #1 with an average rating of 9.3. MinIO holds a 15.6% mindshare in FaOS, compared to Red Hat’s 14.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of MinIO 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 Feb 8, 2026

Red Hat Ceph Storage and MinIO are both scalable storage solutions, with Red Hat Ceph offering robust support for enterprise environments and MinIO noted for its lightweight architecture and high performance. MinIO seems to have the upper hand in terms of performance and efficiency, making it highly suitable for cloud-native applications.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage offers extensive compatibility with various hardware, a comprehensive set of management tools, and enterprise-grade deployment support. MinIO provides high-performance optimization for cloud environments, a simple and efficient design, and native Kubernetes support.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage could benefit from easier initial setup and configuration, improved support for cloud-native applications, and reduced reliance on its complex infrastructure. MinIO could enhance advanced management features, compatibility with more enterprise solutions, and support for larger scale enterprise deployments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat Ceph Storage requires more initial setup and configuration but provides well-structured documentation and support channels. MinIO offers easier deployment due to its lightweight nature and supports rapid scaling in cloud environments, making it easier for teams to prioritize fast deployment.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage may involve higher initial setup costs because of extensive infrastructure needs and potential licensing fees, but it can deliver strong long-term ROI when integrated with other Red Hat solutions for large enterprises. MinIO, being open-source, generally offers lower upfront costs and significant ROI for cloud-native applications due to its efficiency and low overhead, providing a cost-effective solution for many businesses.

To learn more, read our detailed MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,733 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 February 2026, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.5%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MinIO is 15.6%, down from 21.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 14.7%, down from 21.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage	14.7%
MinIO	15.6%
Pure Storage FlashBlade	5.5%
Other	64.2%

File and Object Storage

Q&A Highlights

Netanya Carmi

Content Manager at PeerSpot

Nov 07, 2021

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 solution allows for multiple copies of replicated and coded pools to be kept, easy replacement of failed hard drives, and easy replacement of scaled-out nodes. Red Hat Ceph continues working even when there are failures. We experienced some stability issues when we went beyond the default factor, which is 3. We found that the rebalancing and recovery processes can be a bit slow. Red Hat Ceph can be pretty complex to deploy and has a very big learning curve. MinIO is software-defined, runs in industry-standard hardware, and is an open-source solution. The retrieval of objects with MinIO is significantly better than many of the other solutions we considered. We found deployment to be very simple and even with numerous updates, MinIO ran seamlessly - we experienced no downtime. MinIO is amazing with regard to processing speed, volume, and accessibility to data. It can store large amounts of data, and you can retrieve, load, and transform the data quickly. MinIO offers both a browser interface and a command interface, which we found very useful. MinIO is lacking in a few documentation and monitoring tools that other solutions provide, though. It would be a better and more flexible solution if you could use an uneven disk structure. It would also be great to include some sort of graphical representation of data, like size and data type. Conclusion: We were looking for a high-performance object storage system that would work well with enterprise systems. We found that MinIO offered the stability and scalability in addition to the ability to deploy on-premise, in the cloud, or hybrid options most suitable for our needs.

See all answers

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

Abdelrahim-Ahmad

Data Scientist at a tech vendor with 501-1,000 employees

Provides good object storage functionalities

MinIO should provide an easier subscription model for companies that don't have a huge amount of data. Our company has a maximum of 100 terabytes of data. The solution should provide more bugging tools in the open-source version to encourage people to buy the support services. It's not an easy decision. If I go to the management and tell them that I need to buy a service, there should be an easier subscription model for companies that don't have huge amounts of data. For me, getting a subscription for 15,000 a year for a system already in production might be a bit hard. I think MinIO supports a minimum of one petabyte or 100 terabytes of data. Since we don't have such huge amounts of data, buying a subscription for the solution is a bit difficult. Hence, we're only using the open-source version for now. If MinIO becomes really crucial for our business, we could ask the management to get a subscription.

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

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

"The product is scalable and easy to expand."

"What I like best about Pure Storage FlashBlade is its object storage functionality, plus it has fast underlying hardware. Pure Storage FlashBlade is also very stable. I find its stability one of its valuable features."

"The initial setup is pretty easy and simple."

"I would rate this solution an eight plus. It has has good flexibility and stability, it's easy to manage and the response time is good."

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

"I like its size. It is smaller than the other competitors. We can plug in many blades, and we can have data up to one terabyte."

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

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"Nice web interface, easy to use, with a low memory footprint."

"The tool’s integration is very easy. This feature has helped us reduce development time. The solution also has many out-of-the-box features like versioning support and management of roles and permissions. The product also supports clustered deployment."

"This is an all-in-one, user-friendly data storage."

"MinIO can work with attributes and folders, and it has the ability to use a stream approach for files. I have moments that should work exclusively. It also has some management features you can use, like exclusive locks that you can perform on one record or a collection."

"The initial setup was very easy - one click, and it was installed."

"The most valuable features are that MinIO is open, it works on-premise, and is compatible with the Amazon industry which is great for finding compatible libraries in many languages which is very good for developers."

"It performs efficiently compared to other solutions."

"The most valuable feature of MinIO is its ease of use, replication, and active directory. All the capabilities are in this solution."

More MinIO pros

"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."

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

"I can compare Red Hat Ceph Storage with products from other vendors; I explored quite a few, but I still find that Red Hat Ceph Storage is making the most disruption."

"The configuration of the solution and the user interface are both quite good."

"Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest."

"What I found most valuable from Red Hat Ceph Storage is integration because if you are talking about a solution that consists purely of Red Hat products, this is where integration benefits come in. In particular, Red Hat Ceph Storage becomes a single solution for managing the entire environment in terms of the container or the infrastructure, or the worker nodes because it all comes from a single plug."

"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."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"Its configuration should be easier."

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

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

"In terms of scalability, it doesn't expand out quite as robustly as some of the others, but it covers 90% of the market in what it does."

"The features provided for SMB customers are limited."

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

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

"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

"Limited storage provided in the free version."

"The Distributed User Interface (DUI) needs some work. It's hard to view a large set of data on the DUI. It's an issue with the DUI's performance."

"Lacks documentation for non-Kubernetes users."

"Its reverse proxy features could be better."

"The solution should have high availability. Also, support should be quick."

"The developer support could be better."

"MinIO could use a time patch on it. It could also use better documentation for some languages like Python."

"The scalability is one of the limitations we have found. We are looking for another solution but they must provide the same characteristics, such as an affordable price and continuity."

More MinIO cons

"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."

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

"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."

"Some documentation is very hard to find."

"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."

"Ceph does not deal very well with, or takes a long time to recover from, certain kinds of network failures and individual storage node failures."

"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."

"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

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

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

"Our licensing is renewed annually."

"The price could be cheaper."

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"My company hasn't tried the version of the solution where we need to pay to use it."

"This is an open-source solution but I am using the licensed version."

"We use the solution's open-source version."

"This solution is open source so it is free."

"MinIO is a free open-source solution."

"We use the solution's open-source version."

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

"There is no cost for software."

"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."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage 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

881,733 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%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

14%

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	11
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	9

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

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 MinIO?

I like that if you have a problem, you can buy the home server. It is stable and robust.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for MinIO?

We use the solution's open-source version.

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

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 18% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 8% 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

NetApp StorageGRID vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 4% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

NetApp StorageGRID vs MinIO

Compared 5% of the time

VAST Data vs MinIO

Compared 4% of the time

Cloudian HyperStore vs MinIO

Compared 3% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs MinIO

Compared 3% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs MinIO

Compared 3% of the time

More MinIO Competitors

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) 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

MinIO

January 2026

Download MinIO product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

January 2026

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

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

MinIO is an open-source object storage system. It is designed to efficiently store and retrieve unstructured data, such as photos, videos, and backups. MinIO can be used as a standalone object storage server or as part of a larger system, such as a data lake or a private cloud, and can be deployed on-premise, in the cloud, or in a hybrid environment, making it a flexible storage solution for a variety of use cases.

MinIO’s features include erasure coding, bitrot protection, and checksum validation, which help ensure data integrity and reliability. The solution’s multi-tenancy support makes it ideal for multi-user environments. MinIO’s edge computing tools enable data storage and processing closer to users' locations, reducing latency and improving performance. MinIO can easily scale to accommodate storage and power demands, making it ideal for use in large-scale, data-intensive environments.

MinIO Benefits and Features:

MinIO offers several key benefits and features for organizations looking for a scalable and high-performing object storage solution:

Scalability: Horizontally scale to increase storage space and processing power as your needs grow.

High performance: MinIO’s edge computing and low latency provide fast data access.

Seamless integrations: MinIO is compatible with the Amazon S3 API, which enables integration with third-party systems and tools.

Data integrity: Security features, such as erasure coding, bitrot protection, and checksum validation, ensure data integrity and reliability.

Reduced costs: MinIO is an open-source solution, making it a cost-effective option for organizations looking for a scalable object storage solution.

Support: MinIO’s large open-source community of developers and users provides a wide range of resources and an active support network

Multi-tenancy: Multi-tenancy support makes MinIO suitable for use in multi-user environments.

Easy deployment: MinIO is easy to deploy and can run on a variety of platforms, including on-premise, in the cloud, or in a hybrid environment.

Access control: Role-based access control, enabling you to control access to data based on users permissions.

Event notifications: Automate workflows based on changes to objects in your storage.

Cross-region replication: Duplicate data between different regions for disaster recovery and data backup.

Intuitive interface: MinIO’s user-friendly dashboard can be accessed via any browser and can be used to perform multiple object operations including object creation and management.

Reviews from Real Users

MinIO stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Several major ones are its flexibility, integration options, and performance.

Süleyman Fazıl Y., a senior software engineer at a tech services company, writes, “The most valuable features are that MinIO is open, it works on-premise, and is compatible with the Amazon industry which is great for finding compatible libraries in many languages which is very good for developers.”

Rebecca S., CTO at NIASE, says, “MinIO is much improved over the prior solution, updates are simple to apply, and we anticipate that future capacity requirements will be easier to meet. Our customers are using this solution to retrieve tens of thousands of objects (documents and files) per hour, and MinIO seems to be able to keep up with it.”

MinIO

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

Information Not Available

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

December 2025

Free Report: MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage 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.