NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

NetApp and Red Hat are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. NetApp is ranked #9 with an average rating of 8.3, while Red Hat is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.8. NetApp holds a 5.8% mindshare in FaOS, compared to Red Hat’s 17.3% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of NetApp 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 Nov 4, 2024

Red Hat Ceph Storage and NetApp StorageGRID compete in the enterprise storage market, each offering distinct advantages. Users find Red Hat Ceph Storage favorable for scalability and flexibility, whereas NetApp StorageGRID is preferred for its robust features and enterprise usability.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage offers a scalable architecture, open-source flexibility, and fault-tolerant design, appealing to businesses requiring customization. NetApp StorageGRID excels in advanced data lifecycle management, integrated tiering, and strong compliance features.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage could enhance ease of deployment, user interface simplicity, and comprehensive support documentation. NetApp StorageGRID may improve on cost-effectiveness, user interface flexibility, and performance efficiency in high-demand scenarios.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat Ceph Storage can face challenges during deployment, relying on an active support community. NetApp StorageGRID offers smoother deployment with polished integration services and dependable customer support.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage is cost-effective with favorable ROI, leveraging its open-source nature to reduce setup costs. NetApp StorageGRID incurs higher upfront expenses, justified by its features and performance, offering greater long-term value.

To learn more, read our detailed NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 868,787 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 October 2025, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.7%, down from 6.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp StorageGRID is 5.8%, up from 4.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 17.3%, down from 22.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage	17.3%
Pure Storage FlashBlade	5.7%
NetApp StorageGRID	5.8%
Other	71.2%

File and Object Storage

Featured Reviews

Parul-Patel

Senior Network Engineer at Holy Redeemer Health System, Inc.

High performance and throughput enhance IT backup management

The multi-dimensional scale-out design feature of Pure Storage FlashBlade is not in use in our environment. Regarding data reduction technologies, we don't get much deduplication because the data is already deduplicated from our FlashArray before we get to backup, so there is no benefit of deduplication. Regarding the integration with cloud-native ecosystem tools, we are not on cloud; we are strictly an on-premises solution. Pure Storage FlashBlade is not used by any end-user; it's used only for IT backup, with only about four people in our group managing it. I cannot recommend Pure Storage FlashBlade to other users depending upon their financial situation because it's an expensive solution, and the cost is very high, including licensing and renewal every year. I rate Pure Storage FlashBlade an eight out of ten.

Read full review

Michael Lopez

Sr Systems Engineer at a computer software 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

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 initial setup is pretty quick."

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

"It helps simplify our storage, because the user interface is very simple and the installation is easy."

"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 initial setup is pretty easy and simple."

"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."

"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 technical support team is reliable and responsive."

"The feature of StorageGRID that I find most valuable for ensuring data durability and protection is its Information Lifecycle Management functionality."

"The technical support is good."

"The implementation with NetApp went smoothly. It is a 'setup and forget' type of appliance."

"The feature of NetApp StorageGRID that has significantly improved data storage management for my customers is the value of the S3 API because it allows developers who are not infrastructure-oriented to use it and write code against it."

"It has awesome scalability. We consume it with storage appliance nodes, then we just plug and play as we need more."

"It has enabled us to save money on storage costs. We removed our tape library."

"It helps automate our storage infrastructure."

More NetApp StorageGRID pros

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

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

"Ceph Storage allows us to add value related to cost and offers a unique experience compared to traditional storage."

"The solution is pretty stable."

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

"I would definitely recommend Red Hat Ceph Storage. It is a complete solution for cloud-native storage needs."

"Most valuable features include replication and compression."

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

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

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

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

"In the realm of micro-services, I think that Pure Storage can do well if they start getting in there and making their arrays more micro-services ready."

"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."

"I would like to see better integration."

"They need better integration with public clouds along with a better hybrid solution."

"I would like to see more VM-Aware features in the next release of this solution."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"One key improvement I'd like to see in StorageGRID is enhanced visibility for management purposes."

"It's quite complex, which is a disadvantage; it's enterprise-level, it's complicated to set up, and you need external support."

"We want to move towards Azure in the cloud. Right now, the system is all physical."

"The upgrades of NetApp StorageGRID present challenges. It's a rolling upgrade, node by node. At one point, one node would not upgrade."

"Data retrieval speed could be better."

"Improvements need to be made in the support area."

"The product's continual innovation and enhancement in integration capabilities with other NetApp solutions could be better."

"They can enhance the deduplication and compression features, which are crucial for saving more disk space."

More NetApp StorageGRID 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."

"Routing around slow hardware."

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

"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."

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

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

"Ceph is not a mature product at this time. Guides are misleading and incomplete. You will meet all kind of bugs and errors trying to install the system for the first time. It requires very experienced personnel to support and keep the system in working condition, and install all necessary packets."

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"The product is very expensive."

"The price could be cheaper."

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

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

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

"Our licensing is renewed annually."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"The pricing of StorageGRID falls within the typical range for enterprise-grade solutions and is comparable to other vendors such as Dell, NetApp, and Pure Storage."

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

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

"We chose NetApp because of price and performance."

"The price is attractive."

"NetApp is not known for being the cheapest storage option on the market. Almost all of the other storage options we looked at were less expensive than StorageGRID. The price is one thing to criticize, which is what we hear internally and from customers as well. They find the cost of the terabytes in this class of storage a little bit higher than expected."

"With respect to pricing, it is okay. This product is mid-range."

"Buying the solution is expensive, but it saves you money down the line when you factor in the logistics of not having to buy tapes."

More NetApp StorageGRID pricing and cost advice

"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."

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

"We never used the paid support."

"There is no cost for software."

"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."

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

868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Financial Services Firm

20%

Manufacturing Company

18%

Computer Software Company

15%

University

Computer Software Company

17%

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	20

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

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?

The pricing of Pure Storage FlashBlade is expensive compared to other products I used from other companies in the pas...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?

I believe there is not much improvement needed because they have everything we need, but the interface is a little bi...

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?

It would definitely be more on the expensive side, especially if you compare it with open source solutions like Ceph.

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetApp StorageGRID?

If I could change anything in NetApp StorageGRID, that would be pricing. In terms of functionality, reliability, and ...

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 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

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 11% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 8% of the time

Qumulo vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 3% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

MinIO vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 29% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 23% of the time

Scality RING vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 6% of the time

Hitachi Content Platform vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 6% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 3% of the time

More NetApp StorageGRID Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 41% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 5% of the time

Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 4% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

Dell PowerFlex vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

September 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID

September 2025

Download NetApp StorageGRID product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

September 2025

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

Storage GRID

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

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

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

ASE, DARZ GmbH

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

September 2025

Free Report: NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our NetApp StorageGRID 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.