IBM Cloud Object Storage vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

Download the complete report

Helped 847,772 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 April 2025, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.8%, down from 6.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Cloud Object Storage is 1.1%, down from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 20.3%, down from 22.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage

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

Steve Qualls

Senior Storage Engineer at Q & Q IT Consulting

Offers the ease with which you can move data between on-premises storage and the cloud and then retrieve it back on-premises when necessary

IBM Cloud Object Storage supports big data and analytics workflows. However, I usually have to refer to my documentation for that. Cloud environments are part of almost every project I've been involved in over the last few years, but I rely heavily on documentation whenever I need to do anything in the cloud. I know the basics, but the technical details always need refreshing. I create the drawings or diagrams of how the on-premises and cloud environments interact. So, visual representations are helpful. I'll diagram the on-premises environment, the cloud environment, and any appliances in between and then work from there. The integration capabilities simplified our data workflows. Like, the integration itself is pretty easy. The access appliances create the connection between both environments.

Read full review

ANDRE VINICIUS HAMERSKI

IT Private Cloud & Infrastructure Leader at Sicredi

Offers cost-effective scalability through open-source storage integration

Ceph Storage allows us to add value related to cost and offers a unique experience compared to traditional storage. We appreciate the scalability of the open-source solution, allowing us to address our growing data needs without encountering major issues. Having used it as a pilot system in Brazil, we gained significant knowledge and the ability to manage our infrastructure as code.

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

"Using this solution has made our backups more reliable."

"The product is scalable and easy to expand."

"The initial setup is pretty easy and simple."

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

"The solution provides many controllers."

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

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

"The tool's most valuable features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"The capability to replicate data in different locations is valuable since it enables customers to have a cluster over various sites."

"IBM has the most number of additional services, this is the main advantage."

"The standout feature of IBM Cloud Object Storage is its top-notch security, making it ideal for sensitive applications like mobile financial transactions."

"The most valuable feature I like is when you connect it via CLI plug-in...It is a stable solution."

"The integration itself is pretty easy. The access appliances create the connection between both environments."

"One of Cloud Object Storage's best features is infinite capacity. This is one of the main advantages if you don't want to use your own storage. You also have the ability to write only, write once, and read many. It's like tape storage but software-based. This feature is essential for financial institutions that require that kind of protection if you write backup or data there."

"IBM Cloud Object Storage integrates well."

"Overall, I rate IBM Cloud Object Storage a ten out of ten."

"Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."

"The community support is very good."

"The scalability feature is used by all users and is critical for our operations."

"We have not encountered any stability issues for the product."

"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."

"Ceph Storage allows us to add value related to cost and offers a unique experience compared to traditional storage."

"We use the solution for cloud storage."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"I would like to see more deduplication."

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

"I would also like to see better support for CIFS workloads."

"On our dedupe during our initial buy, we were expecting a number a little higher like 4x. However, we are getting about 3.6. While it is close enough, it doesn't quite hit the numbers. So, this has been a challenge."

"It usually comes down to just what you hit and the value you're getting when you spend the money and license the products. I would always go, "If you want to make things better, lower your price and make your licensing simpler." There's always an opportunity around that."

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

"I have not seen ROI."

"It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"Room for improvement depends on customer needs. Some customers prefer pure Object Storage using the S3 protocol, while others use a gateway in front of the storage grid to enable CIFS or NFS."

"If I had to choose one area, it would be making the consoles more intuitive would be helpful. Sometimes, they can be a little complicated if you're not familiar with them."

"IBM has limited cloud storage."

"The performance could improve in IBM Cloud Object Storage. The throughput or objects per second can have degradation."

"The performance could be better. It isn't bad, but everything is network-based, so you have a performance penalty on the network. You can never achieve the same performance as hardware. That's the disadvantage of cloud storage solutions in general. Cloud performance is one of the main issues clients have."

"One improvement could be incorporating a feature similar to Dropbox's version history. This would allow users to track modifications made to files over time, which is particularly important for maintaining a record of changes. While the free version might not include this feature, it could be included in the paid version to provide added value to clients. Additionally, having a version history feature that allows users to access modifications made to files over the past three months could be beneficial."

"Sometimes technical support lacks a comprehensive understanding of the entire solution, only focusing on the product they support."

"IBM Cloud storage is not cheap, but it could be."

More IBM Cloud Object Storage cons

"Ceph does not deal very well with, or takes a long time to recover from, certain kinds of network failures and individual storage node failures."

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

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

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

"Routing around slow hardware."

"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."

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

"It would be nice to have a notification feature whenever an important action is completed."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

"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 price could be cheaper."

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

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

"The product is very expensive."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"You have the option of a monthly or yearly license. Most customers choose the monthly option. I understand what you would like to say. IBM also lets you choose among four types of Cloud Object Storage. The difference is usage, performance, etc. Of course, high-performance storage is more expensive, while low-performance storage is for cold data, and it's really cheap."

"IBM Cloud is cheaper than AWS. If you want to scale your cloud infrastructure, it can be bought at almost the same price."

"Pricing is not cheap."

"Like most cloud providers, IBM likely charges based on storage capacity, typically per gigabyte or terabyte. Their pricing is competitive when compared to AWS or Microsoft."

"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."

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

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

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

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

"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."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

847,772 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Educational Organization

33%

Computer Software Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Educational Organization

37%

Financial Services Firm

19%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

10%

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...

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...

What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?

Its configuration should be easier. There should be easier language for the configuration.

What do you like most about IBM Cloud Object Storage?

The integration itself is pretty easy. The access appliances create the connection between both environments.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Cloud Object Storage?

In general, Object Storage should be a cheaper solution.

What needs improvement with IBM Cloud Object Storage?

The interface can feel clunky and outdated compared to AWS S3 or Azure Blob Storage. While scalable, latency can be...

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?

I have not identified any drawbacks, however, the response to public platform inquiries could be faster.

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Comparisons

Compared 21% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 11% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 11% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 8% of the time

Dell ECS vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 6% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

MinIO vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 25% of the time

Dell ECS vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 24% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 10% of the time

Cloudian HyperStore vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 8% of the time

IBM Spectrum Scale vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 7% of the time

More IBM Cloud Object Storage Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 42% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 6% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 5% of the time

Dell PowerFlex vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 4% of the time

Portworx Enterprise vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Pure Storage FlashBlade

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Download IBM Cloud Object Storage product report

IBM Cloud Object Storage

April 2025

Software Defined Storage (SDS)

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

Cleversafe

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

IBM Cloud Object Storage is a web-scale platform that stores unstructured data - from petabyte to exabyte - with reliability, security, availability and disaster recovery without replication.

IBM

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

Bitly, Dreamstime, Prime Research

Dell, DreamHost

IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage