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 #10 with an average rating of 7.7, while Red Hat is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.8. NetApp holds a 5.5% mindshare in FaOS, compared to Red Hat’s 20.3% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of NetApp users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 81% 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: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 845,040 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 April 2025, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.8%, down from 6.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp StorageGRID is 5.5%, up from 4.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 20.3%, down from 22.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage

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

Mir Gulzar Ahmed

IT Manager at Synergy Computers

Object-based storage and offers intuitive management tools, making it easy to configure and maintain

The only thing missing is flexibility in configuration to cater to specific customer requirements. Another area of improvement is marketing. NetApp's marketing of StorageGRID isn't optimal. They should present it more effectively, especially in regions like Pakistan. Here, I haven't seen any marketing campaigns from NetApp for StorageGRID or the Solid State Platform (SSP). While StorageGRID is a globally recognized product, I haven't seen any marketing efforts from NetApp in Pakistan. Even competitors are promoting object storage solutions here, but NetApp seems less efficient in selling StorageGRID. There might be one or two customers, but even as a NetApp partner, I'm not aware of any major sales. I've been trained on StorageGRID, and it is a good product. I'm unsure why it hasn't gained traction in Pakistan compared to other countries. So, I just recommend improving the marketing campaigns in Pakistan. I'm pretty confident that if we have one example of successful StorageGRID implementation in Pakistan, other customers will follow suit.

Read full review

ANDRE VINICIUS HAMERSKI

IT Private Cloud & Infrastructure Leader at Sicredi

Offers cost-effective scalability through open-source storage integration

Ceph Storage allows us to add value related to cost and offers a unique experience compared to traditional storage. We appreciate the scalability of the open-source solution, allowing us to address our growing data needs without encountering major issues. Having used it as a pilot system in Brazil, we gained significant knowledge and the ability to manage our infrastructure as code.

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 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."

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

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

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

"The onboarding and integrated monitoring tools are pretty good."

"The most valuable features are the Metro clustering, and disaster recovery."

"I would rate Pure Storage FlashBlade a ten out of ten."

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

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"Cost-effective and easy to deploy."

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

"The backup features are valuable. I've heard from our backup and data protection people that our clients are very satisfied with the performance in junction with the backup, which they archive on this type of object storage."

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

"Duplication, interface and the manageability is good and simple."

"It improves our operational efficiency."

"The management portals have most significantly improved our data retrieval times. They've made it much easier to restore data compared to our previous methods."

"The technical support team is reliable and responsive."

More NetApp StorageGRID pros

"High reliability with commodity hardware."

"We use the solution for cloud storage."

"The community support is very good."

"Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well."

"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."

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

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

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"It's on the expensive side, as expected for a niche product."

"Its configuration should be easier."

"The Pure Storage Orchestrator is our biggest pain point at the moment. If we can have more say in future developments of feature sets that we will need to support for our use case, that would be pretty beneficial to 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."

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

"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."

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

"It usually comes down to just what you hit and the value you're getting when you spend the money and license the products. I would always go, "If you want to make things better, lower your price and make your licensing simpler." There's always an opportunity around that."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"The integration with more apps has room for improvement."

"The only real issue that we have run into is, when we are cloning, we cannot do a thin provision clone, it has to be a full clone."

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

"The processes around installation and upgrade need improvement."

"Data retrieval speed could be better."

"There was a small amount of confusion when working with StorageGRID and Active Directory for access. We had to do things three to four times resulting in our engineer troubleshooting a couple of things. The location of the menu, along with what is inside the menu: configurations, settings, etc., is not straightforward to users. Most users are Windows-based. So, when make logical changes to the menu which are not similar to Windows, users and administrators get confused."

"Beyond the initial setup, this product is a little bit difficult to configure."

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

More NetApp StorageGRID cons

"I've heard the integration with OpenShift is great, however, the licensing cost is excessively high."

"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."

"Some documentation is very hard to find."

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

"This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing."

"I have encountered issues with stability when replication factor was not 3, which is the default and recommended value. Go below 3 and problems will arise."

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

"It needs a better UI for easier installation and management."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

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

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

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

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

"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."

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

"Pure Storage FlashBlade is a hardware appliance, and it's very expensive if you compare its price with other solutions. You can get the same features and benefits from its competitor, VAST Data, but for half the price of Pure Storage FlashBlade."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

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

"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."

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

"Creating your own data stores, backups, or storage grids, helps eliminate all these costs of downloading all the data back after you downloaded to the cloud."

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

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

"We pay for a license annually."

"We chose NetApp because of price and performance."

More NetApp StorageGRID pricing and cost advice

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

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

"There is no cost for software."

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

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

"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."

"We never used the paid support."

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

845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Educational Organization

37%

Computer Software Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

21%

Manufacturing Company

20%

Computer Software Company

17%

Government

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

10%

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

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?

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

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetApp StorageGRID?

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

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?

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

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 21% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 12% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 11% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 8% of the time

Dell PowerStore vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 2% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

MinIO vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 26% of the time

Dell ECS vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 23% of the time

Scality RING vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 7% of the time

Hitachi Content Platform vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 5% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 2% of the time

More NetApp StorageGRID Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 42% 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

Portworx Enterprise vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

March 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID

March 2025

Download NetApp StorageGRID product report

Buyer's Guide

Software Defined Storage (SDS)

March 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

March 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: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

845,040 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.