IBM Cloud Object Storage vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

IBM and Red Hat are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. IBM is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.8, while Red Hat is ranked #2 with an average rating of 7.8. IBM holds a 1.4% mindshare in FaOS, compared to Red Hat’s 22.5% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 80% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

IBM Cloud Object Storage

Read 7 IBM Cloud Object Storage reviews

1,526 Views
980 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

Red Hat Ceph Storage

Read 22 Red Hat Ceph Storage reviews

13,939 Views
12,058 Comparison Views

80% willing to recommend

IBM Cloud Object Storage

Red Hat Ceph Storage

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Red Hat Ceph Storage and IBM Cloud Object Storage both compete in the enterprise storage solutions category. IBM Cloud Object Storage holds the upper hand due to its advanced features and robust security, which justify its higher costs.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage provides excellent scalability and flexibility with integration into open-source ecosystems, making it adaptable for diverse deployments. It offers seamless integration with OpenStack and supports multiple storage types like block and object storage. IBM Cloud Object Storage features infinite capacity and strong data protection, making it ideal for sensitive transaction data. Its integration capabilities enable easy data movement between on-premises and cloud environments.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage can improve in user interface simplicity, reducing complexity for new users. Enhanced support for hybrid cloud environments and more intuitive integration options would make it more competitive. IBM Cloud Object Storage could benefit from reducing initial costs and providing more customizability in data management. Improvements in usability for less technical users and streamlining its setup process would enhance its offering.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat Ceph Storage allows flexible deployments with extensive community support but may pose challenges due to its complexity. IBM Cloud Object Storage offers a simpler deployment process with robust customer service through its established enterprise support channels, making it easier for enterprises to implement and maintain.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage is more cost-effective, primarily due to its open-source nature and lower setup costs, leading to faster ROI. IBM Cloud Object Storage, although requiring a larger initial investment, offers higher ROI potential through its advanced security features and reliability, making it a worthwhile option for businesses with stringent security requirements.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,053 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

IBM Cloud Object Storage

Ranking in File and Object Storage

12th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Red Hat Ceph Storage

Ranking in File and Object Storage

2nd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Software Defined Storage (SDS) (2nd)

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of IBM Cloud Object Storage is 1.4%, down from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 22.5%, down from 23.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage

Featured Reviews

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

Prajwal Kabbinale

Software Engineer at a retailer with 10,001+ employees

Overall satisfied , with easy implementation ,having a notification feature would be helpful

Our primary use case is for integration with OpenStack for block and object storage We use both Red Hat Ceph and Azure storage, for all staging and non-production. Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest. The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure…

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

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

"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."

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

"IBM Cloud Object Storage integrates well."

"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."

"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."

"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."

"Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well."

"Most valuable features include replication and compression."

"High reliability with commodity hardware."

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

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

"Without any extra costs, I was able to provide a redundant environment."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"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."

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

"IBM has limited cloud storage."

"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 area where IBM Cloud Object Storage could potentially improve is in modernizing its underlying codebase."

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

"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."

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

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

"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."

"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."

"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."

"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."

"Routing around slow hardware."

"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

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."

"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."

"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."

"There is no cost for software."

"We never used the paid support."

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

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

824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Educational Organization

41%

Financial Services Firm

17%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

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 IBM Cloud Object Storage?

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

See all answers

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

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. I don't believe it's sig...

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Cloud Object Storage?

All cloud environments have been pretty robust over the last few years. Of course, there's always room for improvement. If I had to choose one area, it would be making the consoles more intuitive w...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Red Hat Ceph Storage?

The high availability of the solution is important to us.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Red Hat Ceph Storage?

Some documentation is very hard to find. The documentation must be quickly available.

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell ECS vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 21% of the time

MinIO vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 18% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 10% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 6% of the time

Cloudian HyperStore vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 6% of the time

More IBM Cloud Object Storage Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 45% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 7% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 4% of the time

Dell PowerFlex vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

Pure Storage FlashBlade vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage

December 2024

Download IBM Cloud Object Storage product report

Buyer's Guide

Software Defined Storage (SDS)

December 2024

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

Cleversafe

Ceph

Learn More

IBM

Red Hat

Overview

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.

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.

Sample Customers

Bitly, Dreamstime, Prime Research

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

December 2024

Free Report: IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.

See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.

We monitor all File and Object Storage reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.