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
231
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
7.6
Number of Reviews
66
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Software Defined Storage (SDS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage9.5%
DataCore SANsymphony6.7%
Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI)6.5%
Other77.3%
Software Defined Storage (SDS)
All-Flash Storage Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tintri VMstore T70002.0%
Dell PowerStore8.5%
NetApp AFF7.0%
Other82.5%
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
Storage And Server Farm (Ucs) Administrator at Meezan Bank Limited
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

"It is an easy to use product for all of my team members."
"Pure Storage FlashArray offers numerous valuable features, such as low latency and high throughput."
"We currently have four Pure Storage FlashArray boxes, and all the storage boxes are on an Evergreen subscription model where we receive the latest hardware and features without any cost in a completely non-intrusive task."
"In Pure Storage FlashArray, the dedupe and compression are excellent, and performance is good too."
"The most valuable feature is it never goes down. We can expand and create volumes."
"Overall, the best returns on investment have been operational simplicity, reliability, and reduced management overhead."
"When we needed to replace the other arrays, we went straight to Pure and life-cycled them into Pure in every segment we have."
"The most valuable feature is replication."
"Data redundancy is a key feature, since it can survive failures (disks/servers) and we didn’t lose our data or have a service interruption during server or disk failures."
"It's possible that we should have used the solution a long time ago as it appears to cost the business less money to run some of our data systems using it."
"The product spawned a new vision of storage deployment, as well as a strong interest in reusing equipment and increasing ROI."
"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, and the solution continues working even when there are errors."
"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."
"Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest."
"The ability to provide block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster is very valuable for us."
"Performance, cost, and ease of storage management."
"A very good support team that is available 24/7. They have real technical staff with strong knowledge."
"I love that Tintri VMstore is so easy to use and manage on a daily basis as well as in the long term. It is hands-off and runs seamlessly without needing daily management. It allows you to go on vacation knowing that everything will work and remain top-notch."
"In the VDI environment, the "VM-aware" T5060, along with its extremely fast speeds, has removed storage as your typical bottleneck."
"The initial setup was absolutely straightforward."
"Stop using LUNs and start working with Tintri."
"Pricing is very competitive, so you get a lot of bang for your buck."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution was how fast it worked on behalf of VDI desktops."
 

Cons

"The cost of the storage needs improvement."
"I would love for them to have a hyper-converged solution."
"Pure Storage FlashArray could improve some aspects. There are certain features that are good and there are some features that I see some issues with at the technical level. Those issues are related to replication. They need to resolve those issues, which I have already highlighted to the Pure team. Additionally, there are some issues in the active cluster that could improve."
"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 would like to get a weekly report of how our storage has been used, and if there is any storage sitting there not being used."
"In terms of the future, I have been excited by some of the copy data management stuff that they're talking about building into the environment. There are feature sets where I've done a lot of automation work. So, I am always looking forward to extensions of their API. They're also talking about a phone home centralized analytics database being used as a centralized management console with a list of new cloud features, but this doesn't seem finalized."
"It was a little costly. The price was ultimately higher than both of the other solutions that we evaluated. I'd say that's the only downside."
"The price of this solution is high and should be lowered."
"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."
"An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions."
"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."
"We have encountered slight integration issues."
"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."
"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI."
"This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing."
"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."
"More cloud integration."
"The solution is already good but the brand name is not so popular here."
"Of course price can always be lower."
"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."
"Of course, a lower price would always be welcome."
"When Tintri gets to either the maximum performance reserves or available disk space, the only upgrade path is to purchase a new unit."
"The solution was challenging."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price, in general, is around $100,000, however, I know it costs more."
"The guaranty that Pure Storage provides when you purchase it doesn't meet the overall capacity needs to provide extra storage, if needed. Thus, it is not meeting our expectations."
"The Evergreen Storage subscription is a really cool concept. As long as we maintain our subscription, we will get new controllers every three years and really never have a forklift upgrade like we currently are doing. Just that future-proofing is an ease off of my mind to know that I won't have to do what I'm dong right now again."
"The cost has room for improvement."
"It is light years beyond anything else with the same price point."
"I don't know the exact cost but it's around $1,000."
"The price is reasonable."
"The price of Pure Storage FlashArray is expensive."
"Most of time, you can get Ceph with the OpenStack solution in a subscription​​ as a bundle.​"
"There is no cost for software."
"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."
"The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure because we own the hardware."
"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."
"The price of this product isn't high."
"With any SAN purchase, the sizing procedure is the most important step."
"It is fairly priced, but it is very important to consider the total cost of ownership over time. The solution has excellent compression and deduplication capabilities, often offering up to three times the raw capacity."
"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."
"The price of Tintri VMstore is not overly high compared to similar solutions."
"The licensing model is relatively simple. For things like replication, however, the licensing needs to be looked at."
"I've always gotten excellent pricing. I'm very satisfied with the pricing that I receive."
"The price is the price and is reasonable for the class of storage."
"The cost of all the SW is well spent because it makes you save on backup and DR."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions are best for your needs.
913,076 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business71
Midsize Enterprise38
Large Enterprise159
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise27
Large Enterprise22
 

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?
I find the pricing of Everpure FlashArray to be quite high compared to other storage solutions; however, the reliabil...
What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashArray?
I believe we have covered the most important features; the architecture of Pure Storage is essential, and features su...
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?
Good documentation is an improvement point. One concern I have with Tintri VMstore T7000, and in general, people are ...
What is your primary use case for Tintri VMstore?
My use cases for Tintri VMstore T7000 involve virtualization and everything automation. It is a good fit because you ...
 

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: August 2026.
913,076 professionals have used our research since 2012.