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

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

Download the complete report

Helped 881,757 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 Software Defined Storage (SDS) category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 3.4%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) is 4.8%, up from 4.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 12.8%, down from 21.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Software Defined Storage (SDS) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)	4.8%
Red Hat Ceph Storage	12.8%
Pure Storage FlashBlade	3.4%
Other	79.0%

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

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

"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."

"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."

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

"The initial setup is pretty quick."

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

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

"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."

"The ease of deployment and management has helped us simplify our storage. We also do not have to worry about capacity management as much. A lot of these things are native to Pure Storage."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"My overall rating for Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) would be nine out of ten, as I have no complaints."

"I strongly recommend Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) to all users as a modern cloud computing system, offering significant cost savings for clients, customers, and vendors while providing excellent cloud infrastructure operations."

"We appreciate how Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) performs very well. We appreciate being able to have the duplication of the data to a secondary location."

"I rate the overall solution ten out of ten."

"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 solution's most valuable features are its support and speed."

"I like Nutanix Prism Central. The primary benefit is that we can manage everything from the same page."

"The solution is easy to use, share, and manage."

More Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) pros

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

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

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

"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."

"Most valuable features include replication and compression."

"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."

"I really like that Red Hat Ceph Storage can be used as a total solution without any storage area network components."

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

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

"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."

"There could be improvements in public cloud integration."

"I would like to see more deduplication."

"There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."

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

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

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

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"With all of the Nutanix equipment, the licensing is expensive. We operate in the enterprise space, but we're a midsized company. At times, the price tag is a little bit shocking for a company with only 35 employees."

"The integration feature with Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) could be improved, maybe into a more stabilized version."

"There is some confusion in the reporting when I have to create the report for statistics. I find it is not so user-friendly."

"Since it's part of Prism, I might suggest integrating the management console into Prism instead of having a separate console; that's the only change I would recommend, and it's not a significant issue."

"Its features can be further enhanced from the DR and high availability points of view to match other vendors, such as NetApp. It has snapshot, replication, high availability, and other data and storage-level replication, but there are some limitations."

"The solution should keep adding new features to be competitive in the market."

"Pain points are just in the management and understanding of how the functions work."

"For improvement, the memory or storage should not exceed 90% capacity, as it becomes difficult to manage beyond this threshold."

More Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) cons

"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."

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

"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."

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

"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."

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

"An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions."

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the tool's pricing a seven to eight out of ten."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"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."

"The product is very expensive."

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

"The price is a little high."

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

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"If we compare the cost of Nutanix Objects Storage to other solutions such as VMware licenses, our current choice is Nutanix Objects Storage. This solution is more cost-effective. However, adding VMware to Nutanix would not be a cost-efficient decision, which is why we do not use it anymore."

"It's competitive and attractive for moving things to it and then prioritizing those newly freed up resources for something else."

"In my opinion, the product is fairly priced."

"The price can always be improved. As a customer, you always seek reasonable solutions within your budget, and they give us little to do a lot. My IT team always has to justify that we are choosing an optimal solution, so the price could be a little lower Maybe the prices could be a little bit lower."

"The licensing model the tool has is cheaper than an HCI storage solution."

"For clients running Nutanix, the licensing cost for Files is a small add-on cost."

"The solution's pricing is fair."

"While the price may not be the most affordable, I believe it offers good value for the benefits it provides."

More Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) pricing and cost advice

"There is no cost for software."

"We never used the paid support."

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

"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."

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

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

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

881,757 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

19%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Educational Organization

Financial Services Firm

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	26
Midsize Enterprise	30
Large Enterprise	66

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...

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...

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...

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.

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

It is very cost-effective compared to the traditional environment. With new hardware, it's a long-term investment but...

What needs improvement with Nutanix Unified Storage?

To improve Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS), cost is always an issue for every company, especially when we talk about la...

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 ...

What do you like most about Red Hat Ceph Storage?

The high availability of the solution is important to us.

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...

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Comparisons

Compared 18% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 9% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 8% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 8% of the time

Scality RING vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 2% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 8% of the time

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

Compared 6% of the time

Amazon S3 vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 5% of the time

VMware Software Defined Storage vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 4% of the time

NetApp AFF vs Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Compared 3% of the time

More Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 50% of the time

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

Dell PowerFlex vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 2% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Pure Storage FlashBlade

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)

Download Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) product report

Red Hat Ceph Storage

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 offers seamless scalability and high availability with a user-friendly interface, supporting multi-protocol operations while integrating effortlessly with cloud platforms. It enhances performance and security with features like ransomware protection and advanced data management.

Nutanix Unified Storage streamlines storage management by consolidating infrastructure and optimizing virtualization. It reduces operational complexity and enhances performance across diverse workloads. Despite feedback on integration challenges and suggestions for improving pricing, API capabilities, and security, it remains a key choice for dependable storage solutions. Calls for streamlined implementation and enhanced AI capabilities reflect its potential to better support evolving organizational strategies, driving cost efficiency and data accessibility.

What are the key features of Nutanix Unified Storage?

Intuitive Interface: Simplifies management with easy navigation.
High Availability: Ensures minimal downtime and reliable performance.
Seamless Scalability: Adapts to increasing data requirements effortlessly.
Multi-Protocol Support: Facilitates comprehensive operations across different systems.
Advanced Security: Offers ransomware protection and secure data backup.
Cloud Integration: Allows smooth interaction with cloud platforms.

What benefits and ROI should users evaluate?

Operational Efficiency: Reduced complexity through streamlined management.
Cost Optimization: Achieved via data compression and consolidation.
Enhanced Data Visibility: Improved insights with advanced data lens.
Performance Improvement: Significant uplift in workload handling and database performance.
Scalable Infrastructure: Enables growth and adaptation to changing demands.

In industries, Nutanix Unified Storage is deployed to centralize storage needs, improve database efficiency, and enhance file sharing and security. Organizations use it to consolidate infrastructure, support virtualization, optimize costs, and facilitate virtual machine hosting. It's instrumental in scalable object storage, ransomware protection, integrating legacy systems, and catering to critical applications.

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

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