Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Hitachi Content Platform vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

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

Hitachi Content Platform
Ranking in File and Object Storage
16th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat Ceph Storage
Ranking in File and Object Storage
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined Storage (SDS) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Hitachi Content Platform is 1.5%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 14.5%, down from 20.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
File and Object Storage Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage14.5%
Hitachi Content Platform1.5%
Other84.0%
File and Object Storage
 

Featured Reviews

Mir Gulzar Ahmed - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at Synergy Computers
Integrates well with existing systems but technical support for the platform needs improvement
While deployment is simple, it's not as simple as StorageGRID. The architecture is entirely different, even though the end product uses the same protocols. The user interface isn't as user-friendly, and the management platform UI isn't as intuitive as others. Deployment isn't as centralized either. Although I've deployed Hitachi Content myself in our production head office for the VM team, even though it's simple, it wasn't completely straightforward. They still required my help with the initial configuration environment setup. So, it's not just simple; there are some tricky aspects. The environment is tricky, but if you understand it, configuration can be done quickly.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The way that they handle the DR is very good because when there is a failover, it is seamless to the users."
"The product provides the fastest technology."
"As an architect, I like the management features that come with Hitachi Content Platform because it makes things easy."
"Integrating Hitachi Content Platform with existing systems is not challenging."
"The Hitachi Content Platform is a stable and reliable solution."
"The features that I have found most valuable are their retention logs. The other thing I have found most valuable is the way they handle the BHEA. Basically the DNS and everything is managed by itself. It is seamless to the users."
"Hitachi is a big company, so it's a very strong product."
"Companies can scale the solution."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"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."
"The high availability of the solution is important to us."
"I really like that Red Hat Ceph Storage can be used as a total solution without any storage area network components."
"The community support is very good."
"We are using Ceph internal inexpensive disk and data redundancy without spending extra money on external storage."
"Most valuable features include replication and compression."
"High reliability with commodity hardware."
 

Cons

"At present, it is complicated to use the CLI command."
"They could improve compatibility and offer a more user-friendly GUI."
"The solution could use more integration with clouds."
"The only thing is that it should be more cost effective."
"The user interface isn't as user-friendly, and the management platform UI isn't as intuitive as others. So it can be more user-friendly."
"Two things that can be improved are pricing and configuration. Mostly the pricing is an issue. And if I were to add anything, I would say more integration with backup solutions such as Veeam Backup."
"They should improve the user interface. It's a little bit complex. It does not have a self-learning method. You need to know how to use it before you touch the system. The user interface is not self-explanatory."
"Hitachi Content Platform is a complicated solution. You need to put several pieces of the hardware together in order to achieve the capacity or the performance needed."
"It took me a long time to get the storage drivers for the communication with Kubernetes up and running. The documentation could improve it is lacking information. I'm not sure if this is a Ceph problem or if Ceph should address this, but it was something I ran into. Additionally, there is a performance issue I am having that I am looking into, but overall I am satisfied with the performance."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI."
"We have encountered slight integration issues."
"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."
"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."
"The licensing cost is excessively high. This is a significant issue from my perspective."
"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."
"While the documentation for Ceph Storage is helpful, it could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Hitachi is more expensive than StorageGRID."
"Pricing is comparable to other solutions in the market."
"The price of the Hitachi Content Platform is very high."
"The pricing could be better."
"I think the ROI for this solution is very good because the pricing for it is in between other solutions."
"Overall, it's costly."
"The product’s cost is average."
"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.​"
"The price of this product isn't high."
"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."
"There is no cost for software."
"The price of Red Hat Ceph Storage is reasonable."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.
884,328 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Government
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Hitachi Content Platform?
In comparison to competitors like Huawei, which can use all storage protocols in the same platform, Hitachi Content Platform lacks the integration of block, file, and object on a single system. Alt...
What is your primary use case for Hitachi Content Platform?
Mainly, from my project, Hitachi Content Platform is used for archiving. The customer is in banking, so they need to keep their long-term data on the platform. The platform is replacing their exist...
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 solution allows for multiple copies of replicated and coded pools to be kept, ea...
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 the Stratus case, which is one of the most reliable systems available in the world...
 

Also Known As

HCP, Hitachi Vantara Content Platform, Hitachi Vantara HCP
Ceph
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rabobank, Xinhua News Agency, Kremsm'ller Industrieanlagenbau KG, KSC Commercial Internet, AIS Group, Shanghai Interactive Television Co. Ltd (SiTV), China Telecom, Spin Master
Dell, DreamHost
Find out what your peers are saying about Hitachi Content Platform vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,328 professionals have used our research since 2012.