No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Tintri VMstore T7000 comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Everpure FlashArray
Sponsored
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
232
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (3rd)
Red Hat Ceph Storage
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined Storage (SDS) (3rd), File and Object Storage (2nd)
Tintri VMstore T7000
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Software Defined Storage (SDS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage9.4%
DataCore SANsymphony6.7%
Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI)6.5%
Other77.4%
Software Defined Storage (SDS)
All-Flash Storage Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tintri VMstore T70002.1%
Dell PowerStore8.0%
NetApp AFF6.9%
Other83.0%
All-Flash Storage
 

Featured Reviews

Sowjanya MV - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at Wipro Limited
Has improved performance for mission-critical workloads and enabled seamless non-disruptive upgrades
The availability is 99.99%, which is the main factor any customer would need because their data should be available whenever they want to access it. This is one main critical thing. It is very easy to upgrade since Pure Storage FlashArray handles it well. Everything is non-disruptive now; previously, there were forklift shifts, but now that is not the case. Pure Storage FlashArray says no to forklift upgrades. Usually hardware requires downtime, but Pure Storage FlashArray has improved their footprint so that they are not asking for downtime; everything is just a non-disruptive activity, which is why customers are more inclined towards Pure Storage FlashArray. Customers want more of the models in their environment due to the performance they are giving, and everything is in one Pure1 Array console where we can view all the models on one page or just an orchestration tool. You don't miss anything; you have replication, notifications about replication, and details about which host groups replication is happening in and if that replication is successful or failed. On a daily basis, our purpose is to create volumes for infrastructure; our daily activities include creating volumes and mapping them to the host, doing any migrations from a VM, clearing the data stores, and carving the volumes to those VMs. One key factor is the data compression with a ratio of 5:1, focusing on space efficiency, inline deduplication, and the compression Pure Storage FlashArray works on; that is a major factor we can suggest to any customer. Analytical capabilities are crucial. Daily, we check the throughput and consumption, and Pure Storage FlashArray provides predictions for one year regarding usage. This prediction helps plan updates well ahead. For support, we just raise a case, and they follow up and get it done. There is also AI readiness, but with the model R2, we don't have much of that AI readiness. For others, we do have AI readiness that predicts capacity based on daily or monthly trends, enabling us to analyze how much space we need or if we need to expand the disk shelf. From an operational point of view, a good feature is that if you accidentally delete a volume, it will be retained in the destroyed state for the next twenty-four hours, which is not the same with any other vendor. I have worked in this storage domain for the past fifteen years, and this option is remarkable, benefiting any L1 or L2 engineer. Additionally, from a compliance perspective, Pure Storage FlashArray has REST APIs enabled. I have not explored automation much, but from a security standpoint, it is strong with encryption data. If you want to automate, you can easily integrate with all clouds and explore Pure Cloud for scheduling workloads, including volume creation. Customers find benefit in Pure Storage FlashArray's single management pane of glass due to the dual controller and active-active setup. If one of the controllers goes down, all workloads automatically shift to the other controller, ensuring their data is safe and accessible at all times. This is a highlighted feature that any customer desires because their data should always be accessible. For SAN workloads, we use Pure Storage FlashArray because for SAN FC fiber channel, we don't use it; we use NetApp for NAS activities. We have clearly split this, so SAN is for mission-critical applications, while network-attached storage handles file systems. This architecture helps us maximize the benefit from Pure Storage FlashArray due to the significant workloads from this giant retail client. From a footprint and energy consumption perspective, you can see energy consumption from the Pure1 storage portal on a daily basis, and it is very compact. The three models we use consume only three units, which is quite low. From a footprint and data center perspective, it doesn't occupy much space. As everything moves to cloud, there are requirements to avoid excess spending on data centers, and Pure Storage FlashArray is efficient in energy consumption and is environmentally friendly.
Rifat Rahman - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Tanesh Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior System Engineer at SiliconSt.
Vm-aware storage has simplified vmware management and delivers strong deduplication and savings
There are many good features for Tintri VMstore T7000, especially its nature of understanding VMware. It is VM-aware storage, which is a very good characteristic. When any VM is moved from one host to another host, there is no way to see where it is running. It is very smooth in action. Trintri VMstore T7000 is totally autonomous. We have integrated it with our virtualization environment, so all the VMs and machines running in our environment move between one Tintri VMstore T7000 and another without requiring any manual intervention. The system can schedule resources from its own capabilities. If one Tintri VMstore T7000 becomes full, the machine will be moved to another automatically. This autonomous system is very beneficial. Nowadays, all storage comes with NVMe flash and all storage is coming with flash storages as well. Tintri VMstore T7000 is much easier to handle. We just need to integrate the whole Tintri VMstore T7000 with vCenter and all the work will be done by vCenter. If we want to check what the deduplication will be, there is a really good feature of Tintri VMstore T7000 called TGC. We can integrate all Tintri VMstore T7000 systems from one end and manage all of them from a single endpoint. The major benefit of using Tintri VMstore T7000 is its deduplication and compression ratio, which is around 4x to 5x. No other storage is giving that much ratio. This is really good and much cost-saving for the company. Administrative cost is reduced because Tintri VMstore T7000 gives us a single point where we can manage it. This is both time-saving and cost-saving.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"This solution has improved the way our organization functions through its reliability and consistent platform for storage and has helped us to simplify storage because the management tools make everything a lot easier."
"We tested our VDI environment on this array and it performed flawlessly and boosted the user experience."
"The availability and ease of use are the big features."
"The management is simple in Pure Storage FlashArray."
"It is an easy to use product for all of my team members."
"The best features Everpure FlashArray offers are its ease of setup and incredible performance, which is better than most other software or hardware that we have used."
"The all-flash disc is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"It has simplified our storage."
"The product allows our OpenStack environment to move away from the classic network type of backend storage and enables increased resilience using commodity hardware pricing, which is a major benefit."
"The community support is very good."
"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."
"Most valuable features include replication and compression."
"I really like that Red Hat Ceph Storage can be used as a total solution without any storage area network components."
"The configuration of the solution and the user interface are both quite good."
"Companies that can afford completely flash-based pipe servers should go for Ceph because it's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability."
"We have not encountered any stability issues for the product."
"I like Tintri's Global Admin feature and the solution's performance. It's incredibly fast storage, which was a significant upgrade for us when we deployed it seven years ago. The Tintri snapshots are brilliant and incredibly reliable."
"Tintri Snapshot, vCenter integration, powerCLI integration, the way you manage everything; bye bye time spent on managing storage arrays."
"Tintri VMstore has improved my organization by providing a huge performance increase, mostly to our Citrix XenApp environment."
"The storage is VMware, so it knows how to optimize performance for VMs, which is what we use exclusively in our modern data center."
"As soon as we put it in place, we noticed a threefold speed increase in the overall system."
"Everyone says wonderful things about what their storage can do but Tintri actually delivers on the promises they make."
"Tintri VMstore is rock solid. We have not had a single issue with stability. It is also very low maintenance allowing us to concentrate on project work."
"Among the most valuable features are its granular replication, the ability to define asynchronous or synchronous replication, which gives us very definable RTOs and RPOs around that type of service, and granular quality-of-service configuration, which allows for cases where you've got multiple customers on a single Tintri, but you want to be able to offer strong quality-of-service metrics and KPIs."
 

Cons

"CIFS and SMB Shares cannot be mounted directly."
"I would recommend improvements in the graphical user interface, specifically a detailed hardware view that would allow us to see the individual drives and individual controllers more easily, as currently, they are presenting only a higher-level view."
"In the next release of the solution I would like to see Vormetric native block encryption."
"The best way to improve Pure Storage FlashArray is the active DR because that can get very confusing, especially when you're trying to test a failover and replicate back; better instructions on how to do that would help because we actually lost an entire volume when we were testing out some stuff as the fingerprint got reinitialized, and when you replicated back, it didn't know about that volume, causing a failure in that process."
"I feel like there is too much automation; the user doesn't have any manual input."
"I wish they could add more of a monitor on the machine itself so you don't have to rely on a KVM or something to look at the display, such as an onboard diagnostic display."
"Going forward, don't complicate things for the customers."
"We have not had a good experience with the IBM device."
"I have not identified any drawbacks, however, the response to public platform inquiries could be faster."
"Some documentation is very hard to find."
"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."
"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."
"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."
"An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions."
"I've heard the integration with OpenShift is great, however, the licensing cost is excessively high."
"It needs a better UI for easier installation and management."
"It would be beneficial if Tintri could identify issues through telemetry and notify us before we need to contact them."
"Not a fan of SyncVM being an addition license."
"For now we don't have scalability issues, but It would be nice to add an external bay for additional storage space."
"There were stability issues only when we exceeded the operational limitations."
"The Tintri Analytics site is excellent for long-term trending, but more data would be great."
"Their support staff just doesn't have the experience with all of the products that we're running. They don't know the 850 series like we do because it's five years old. There is a little bit of a gap, and that may just be because we're an old customer running on platforms that their staff hasn't seen. I would like to see an improvement in their in-depth knowledge of their older products."
"Technical support is an area where we had several issues, and it was hard to get some support in a specific case we had. I'm not very satisfied with them."
"Integration of all the interfaces: For each Tintri For the global centre management Analytics The interfaces are all great, but if all the functionality were built into one global centre, this would make the interface a single pane."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In terms of other contemporary arrays, Pure is something you need to have a use case for, as it's not priced for you to buy one off-the-shelf. If you have a use case, heavy lift Oracle Databases, any type of noticeable virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI), or need low latency and high throughput, you should consider all-flash at least and probably Pure Storage."
"The cost of Pure Storage is subjective and determined by your environment. Pure Storage tends to be more expensive than NetApp, but it is cheaper than EMC. Performance varies with data workload, making cost considerations complex."
"FlashArray is expensive, but the quality justifies the price."
"Because of the SSD, it is cheaper because I am not purchasing so many disks."
"Price is about the only thing that's wrong with it. A little bit better pricing would be great."
"We implemented Pure Storage FlashArray nine years ago when it was new to the market and obtained it at a preferential price."
"The price of Pure Storage FlashArray could always improve. They are still more expensive than some alternative offerings. Cost is always a concern and when there is a battle they tend to be more expensive."
"In comparison to the competitors, Pure is very price-competitive for the future functionality that it provides."
"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."
"The price of this product isn't high."
"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."
"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."
"Tintri is reasonably priced for the solution you get. Advanced features do require extra to use."
"We haven't found Tintri's pricing to be a barrier to entry for any of our customers. Tintri works through a number of distributors and when we've had to purchase it for our customers we have found the pricing to be competitive."
"Prices are not cheap, but it runs."
"Ensure the storage system "natively" supports the protocols that you wish to use (i.e., CIFS) without the need for the overhead of internal "conversion VMs" that run the protocols."
"What I have heard, price-wise, is that Tinti was definitely very competitive. That's one of the reasons it was chosen for us."
"The cost of all the SW is well spent because it makes you save on backup and DR."
"Make sure that you have all licenses in one go. Options afterwards can cost extra."
"The licensing model is relatively simple. For things like replication, however, the licensing needs to be looked at."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions are best for your needs.
919,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business73
Midsize Enterprise38
Large Enterprise160
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise27
Large Enterprise24
 

Questions from the Community

Which should I choose: HPE 3PAR StoreServ or Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series?
Both are great platforms, but if you are considering all flash solutions, I would recommend you to consider Pure Stor...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashArray?
When comparing cost, I find that the cost is either the same or slightly higher, but that is returned by the ease of ...
What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashArray?
The only thing I think could be improved is price. The price is the main concern for our customers.
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 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...
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tintri VMstore?
The pricing of Tintri VMstore T7000 is cost-efficient. It is pretty costly as all IT investments in infrastructure ar...
What needs improvement with Tintri VMstore?
One way Tintri VMstore T7000 can be improved is by showing past snapshots that were deleted, providing a history of s...
What is your primary use case for Tintri VMstore?
Our main use case for Tintri VMstore T7000 is hosting a large number of virtual machines, with the capacity to store ...
 

Also Known As

Pure Storage FlashArray
Ceph
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
Dell, DreamHost
That’s why leading enterprises including Comcast, Chevron, NASA, Toyota, United Healthcare and 20% of the Fortune 100, trust Tintri with storage needs.
Find out what your peers are saying about StarWind, Nutanix, Red Hat and others in Software Defined Storage (SDS). Updated: October 2026.
919,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.