Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

Nutanix and Red Hat are both solutions in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category. Nutanix is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.8, while Red Hat is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.9. Nutanix holds a 5.3% mindshare in SDS, compared to Red Hat’s 20.0% mindshare. Additionally, 98% of Nutanix 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 Nutanix Unified Storage are enterprise solutions in the scalable and reliable storage market. Red Hat Ceph often surpasses Nutanix with more competitive pricing and support satisfaction, whereas Nutanix gains favor with its comprehensive feature set, appealing to those prioritizing advanced capabilities.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage offers advantages with its scalability, open-source flexibility, and support for block, object, and file storage, catering well to diverse infrastructure needs. Nutanix Unified Storage distinguishes itself with integrated data services, seamless deployment within Nutanix's hyper-converged infrastructure, and robust analytics, enhancing data insight and management. For organizations emphasizing integration within their systems, Nutanix provides a more cohesive solution.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph could enhance its user-friendliness and technical support to cater to less technically adept users. Greater interoperability with existing systems and improved native analytics would also add value. Nutanix Unified Storage could benefit from price optimization, as its higher initial cost is a concern. Additionally, providing more customization options and simplified integration processes would further solidify its market position.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Nutanix Unified Storage is noted for its straightforward deployment and excellent customer service, largely due to its integration with Nutanix hyper-converged solutions. This focus on user experience and support is key for customers seeking streamlined operations. Red Hat Ceph Storage, while flexible, requires more expertise and presents certain complexities during deployment, potentially deterring users favoring simplicity.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph offers lower initial costs and is appealing to budget-conscious organizations, delivering reliable ROI in scalable operations. Nutanix Unified Storage, while involving a higher upfront investment, offers substantial ROI through its advanced features and integration capabilities, making it attractive for those prioritizing a feature-rich path despite the higher financial outlay.

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

Buyer's Guide

Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

May 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 860,168 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 Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) is 5.3%, up from 2.7% 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

Amarnath Charugundla

System Engineer at Tata Consultancy

Unified management and cost-effectiveness lead to positive experiences and future savings

Improvement is necessary wherein the memory or storage should not breach 90%, because if breached, it becomes unmanageable. We have to set alerts or CPU triggering for 95% for the first warning. Other activities on nodes or file systems should be properly maintained. We must monitor the dashboard for P1, P2 alerts in the Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) file share system including SMB, NFS, objects, and blocks. Attention should be maintained for any alerts such as CPU, memory, and RAM alerts, as exceeding these creates issues within teams. If triggered to 95% and forgotten, it crosses the SLA breach, causing disturbances to application, web, and platform teams. Continuous monitoring on the Nutanix dashboard is essential. Even a highly experienced person in Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) cannot provide a 10 rating out of 10 because it is a vast system. I would rate it eight from my perspective.

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

"Among its most appealing features are its ease of handling and minimal maintenance requirements."

"The product is scalable and easy to expand."

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

"The initial setup is pretty easy and simple."

"It's very easy-to-use."

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

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

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

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"My company has benefitted from Nutanix Unified Storage because we have everything in a centralized place. With Prism Central, we can go to the console files and do what we have to do."

"The aspect of the product that I like the most is its simplicity."

"We have virtually zero downtime with Nutanix. It updates itself, and we can easily move machines from one cluster to another."

"It removes a layer of aggregation to present storage to end users, so we do not have Windows file servers. This benefits our company by reducing one of our attack planes from a cybersecurity perspective, so we do not have to worry about the OS."

"The initial setup is pretty straightforward. With a few clicks, you can stand up your storage. It reduces the overall life cycle of deployment within the ecosystem."

"The product's initial setup phase was simple."

"The benefit for our customers is cost effectiveness. The customer is spending substantial money refreshing NetApp storage. We identified a use case from a NAS point of view. Using Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) helps in reducing costs, as they are not spending a dedicated cost for storage procurement."

"The migration from VMware to Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) is less complex and less troublesome, and the replication and clustering are very good."

More Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) pros

"High reliability with commodity hardware."

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

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

"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."

"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."

"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."

"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."

"We use the solution for cloud storage."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"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."

"I would like to see more deduplication."

"I would like to see the licensing fees improved as well as the price per terabytes."

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

"Recently, while upgrading the version code, one of the controllers failed. Replacing the controller took between 14 to 20 days."

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

"Compared to, for example, Hitachi NAS, the solution is not mature at all. It's just in its infancy as far as technology goes."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"Customer service is more difficult to call and they do not responding as much as, for example, DataCore. It's not the same level of satisfaction compared to DataCore. Responses could be faster."

"There are still some gaps in the solution's synchronization that could be improved."

"The current hardware is not as dense as it could be. In our deployment, we have 2 PB per site, and we have to have 24 nodes. That's a lot of cabling and network ports that we use up. More dense nodes would be better."

"There are some processes, like if I like to change the data storage to another place, I have to use CLI, and I don't like it since I believe that it could have been simpler in GUI."

"Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) needs improvement in compatibility with Windows solutions."

"Security is an area for improvement. When there are vulnerabilities, there needs to be a faster approval process. The solution needs to automatically target the vulnerabilities and not waste too much time."

"It would be beneficial if there were a migration tool for the new way of syncing data for data protection."

"There is no tagging concept in Nutanix Unified Storage where you can tag the servers."

More Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) cons

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

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

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

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

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

"Some documentation is very hard to find."

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

"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is very expensive."

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

"The price could be cheaper."

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

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

"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."

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

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

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"The solution's pricing is fair."

"The solution’s pricing could be cheaper."

"It is very good. It is much more competitive than a dedicated storage platform."

"The licensing currently works based on a software license. If we have files, volumes, and other licenses combined, that would be more valuable. I don't want to go for a separate license for files and a separate license for volumes. We have unified storage, so the licensing should also be unified. That would be helpful."

"The cost of Nutanix Unified Storage can be prohibitive for some small and medium-sized businesses, making it challenging for them to adopt the product."

"Nutanix is very competitive."

"It is competitive with other vendors, but you get more for your dollars. It is fairly priced, but not cheap."

"Nutanix Unified Storage was cheaper than other solutions we evaluated."

More Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) pricing and cost advice

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

"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."

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

"We never used the paid support."

"There is no cost for software."

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

"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 Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

860,168 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

31%

Educational Organization

12%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

11%

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

What do you like most about Nutanix Unified Storage?

Nutanix has excellent product documentation available on their portals, written in simple, easy-to-understand language.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Nutanix Unified Storage?

Nutanix solutions are often perceived as premium-priced, but they deliver substantial ROI in terms of performance, re...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Nutanix Unified Storage?

In terms of improvement areas for Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS), pricing is a significant issue, and another aspect i...

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

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

Scality RING vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 2% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 15% of the time

MinIO vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 10% of the time

Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 9% of the time

VAST Data vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 5% of the time

Amazon S3 vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 5% of the time

More Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) 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

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 2% 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

Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

June 2025

Download Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

June 2025

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

Nutanix Files Storage, Nutanix Volumes Block Storage, Nutanix Objects Storage

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

Nutanix Unified Storage provides high availability and seamless cloud platform integration, ensuring robust redundancy, scalability, and streamlined management. It supports hybrid cloud connectivity, enhancing storage security and performance.

Nutanix Unified Storage is designed for effective data protection across block, file, and object storage, offering features like ransomware detection and a centralized management interface through Prism Central. Users gain improved SLAs and IT cost savings through its efficient performance. Despite its user-friendly interface, there is a demand for enhanced security measures such as Multi-Factor Authentication and DLP. While its resilience is notable, users seek improvements in protocol compatibility, storage capabilities, pricing, and support processes.

What are the most important features of Nutanix Unified Storage?

User-Friendly Interface: Simplifies storage management and monitoring.
High Availability: Ensures continuous operation and reliability.
Seamless Cloud Integration: Compatible with platforms like Azure and AWS.
Robust Redundancy: Protects data against hardware failures.
Scalable Architecture: Easily adapts to growing data storage needs.
Ransomware Detection: Enhances data protection measures.

What benefits and ROI might users find in reviews?

Improved SLAs: Increased service reliability and performance.
IT Cost Savings: Reduces expenses through efficient resource use.
Enhanced Security: Stronger data protection and reduced risk.
Centralized Management: Easier control and monitoring from one dashboard.

Industries implement Nutanix Unified Storage for tasks such as file storage, database performance improvement, and storage solution consolidation. Companies deploying virtual machines, securing against ransomware, connecting hybrid clouds, and backing up data find it useful. It supports workloads like Citrix VDI, Kubernetes, and research data, assisting many organizations migrating from legacy storage for better cost efficiency and reduced data center footprints.

Nutanix

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

JetBlue, International Speedway Corporation, Volkswagen SAIC, Brighton and Hove City Council, Foresters Financial, Janus International Group, Cloud Comrade, Serco

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

May 2025

Free Report: Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

Find out what your peers are saying about Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.

See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors and best File and Object Storage 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.