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

IBM Spectrum Scale vs Portworx Enterprise comparison

 

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

IBM Spectrum Scale
Ranking in Cloud Software Defined Storage
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined Storage (SDS) (7th)
Portworx Enterprise
Ranking in Cloud Software Defined Storage
2nd
Average Rating
9.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Data Storage for Kubernetes (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Cloud Software Defined Storage category, the mindshare of IBM Spectrum Scale is 27.3%, down from 32.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Portworx Enterprise is 34.6%, up from 31.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Software Defined Storage
 

Featured Reviews

JanithRanasinghe - PeerSpot reviewer
Parallel file access efficiency and good file management with good scalability
We are using GPFS Scale for parallel file access. It's primarily for file management We use GPFS Scale for parallel file access, the file management, and it's an essential part of our operations. It's the only feature we are using since we have not explored other options. I wish there were some…
Paulo Jose  Bosco Otto - PeerSpot reviewer
A solution backed by strong customer support, that is stable and scalable
As a company managed in a Kubernetes environment, being trusted by a Kubernetes vendor, Red Hat creates barriers against using other certified solutions that work. Because IBM is a competitor of Pure Storage, things seem to be getting worse. I don't have plans to use Portworx Enterprise in the future because, at the moment, I am working with Ondat, and I have to follow NetApp's direction on that. When evaluating Portworx, one should make sure their company has already chosen Pure Storage. Still, if they are evaluating the solution on Ondat or Dell or other platforms, they should get a roadmap statement from Pure Storage, that they will continue to develop storage hardware diagnostics. I rate Portworx a nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The high performance of the solution is its most valuable aspect. If you compare it to other storage solutions, it's much better."
"I find IBM Spectrum Scale to be an excellent product known for its fast parallel file system."
"We are using it for monitoring all of our storage."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Allows us to share files across multiple environments."
"We can have multiple systems within the same file system."
"Technical support has been very helpful. They provide us with pretty good solutions that we can implement moving forward."
"We use GPFS Scale for parallel file access, the file management, and it's an essential part of our operations."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"Portworx is a simple solution. It's similar to Pure Storage products. They're all easy to use and install. You need to have a little expertise with containers to use Portworx, but it will be no problem for you if you understand containers."
"I like that you have a small dedicated file system that is fast and resilient for containerized workloads."
"A custom IBM script is designed to tackle the storage management challenges within containerized environments, providing crucial data services and features required for enterprise applications."
"Portworx virtualizes the aspects of the underlying block storage. That is good because they can also use block storage for their future deployment instead of just NFS."
"The best thing about Portworx is the Stork, they have called the VPS (Volume Replacement Strategy) and they also have topology awareness, and these are the three features I like."
 

Cons

"Integration with other vendors is not available."
"There can be improvements in fault tolerance and making erasure coding faster."
"They should probably simply the Red Hat implementation portion. This portion was not as straightforward as I would like it to be."
"The pricing and licensing model for this solution are complex and it is sometimes difficult to explain it to customers."
"The main issue that we have now is with the encryption. They want to use more metrics in encryption, which is not working very well."
"Maybe it needs integration with HA."
"The initial setup is complex, especially if trying to avoid erasure coding, as it requires more discs. Avoiding erasure coding can significantly increase costs."
"Making it a little easier to add bad file sets would help. There is a transition to how you add storage and how you add a file set, so making that a little smoother would probably be my recommendation."
"They have not integrated Portworx with Ondat since they are too focused now on Pure Storage APIs and not on users like us."
"I think the vendor could provide more training for new users who may not be familiar with containers."
"I would like to see a more native mapping to mainframe-type systems."
"It would be highly advantageous to include an integrated backup solution within the same license, rather than purchasing backup separately."
"The integration has room for improvement."
"The documentation could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing is based on the number of terabytes."
"The solution is costly but reliable."
"The licensing model is complex and depends on factors such as the number of processing cores and the amount of storage."
"The price is competitive, but it is too expensive when paired with Red Hat IBM."
"The price of Portworx Enterprise is high."
"It has two offerings. One is free, which is limited to only five nodes. The other is enterprise, which is a bit pricier."
"I'm not sure how the licensing was broken out, but I don't think our offering of the Portworx was more than USD $20,000."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Software Defined Storage solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Educational Organization
8%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with IBM Spectrum Scale?
I wish there were some graphical user interface to access the GPFS file system creation and monitoring.
What do you like most about Portworx Enterprise?
A custom IBM script is designed to tackle the storage management challenges within containerized environments, providing crucial data services and features required for enterprise applications.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Portworx Enterprise?
The price is competitive, but it is too expensive when paired with Red Hat IBM.
What needs improvement with Portworx Enterprise?
It would be highly advantageous to include an integrated backup solution within the same license, rather than purchasing backup separately. It would ensure a comprehensive and streamlined approach ...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
NIO, GE Digital, DreamWorks Animation, Lufthansa, beco, NEW CONTEXT
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Spectrum Scale vs. Portworx Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.