NetApp StorageGRID vs SwiftStack [EOL] comparison

NetApp and NVIDIA are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. NetApp is ranked #6 with an average rating of 8.2, while NVIDIA is ranked #20. NetApp holds a 4.9% mindshare in FaOS, compared to NVIDIA’s 1.5% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of NetApp users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of NVIDIA users who would recommend it.

NetApp StorageGRID

Read 13 NetApp StorageGRID reviews

3,317 Views
2,593 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

SwiftStack [EOL]

Read 8 SwiftStack [EOL] reviews

1,072 Views
901 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

NetApp StorageGRID

SwiftStack [EOL]

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between NetApp StorageGRID and SwiftStack [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two File and Object Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed NetApp StorageGRID vs. SwiftStack [EOL] Report (Updated: September 2024).

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID vs. SwiftStack [EOL]

September 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 802,829 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

NetApp StorageGRID

Ranking in File and Object Storage

6th

Average Rating

8.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

SwiftStack [EOL]

Ranking in File and Object Storage

20th

Average Rating

8.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2024, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of NetApp StorageGRID is 4.9%, up from 4.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SwiftStack [EOL] is 1.5%, down from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage

Featured Reviews

reviewer2352861

Chief Administrative Officer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

Mar 1, 2024

Scalable object storage with robust data durability with efficient geo-distribution and comprehensive lifecycle management ensuring managing of large volumes of unstructured data

NetApp StorageGRID, like AWS S3, adheres to standards for decoupling data from metadata. However, the product faces challenges in this area, particularly concerning the storage of metadata. Unlike some other solutions, StorageGRID stores all metadata in the first storage node, and expanding metadata capacity necessitates adding more storage nodes. This design choice, using Cassandra database for metadata storage, can lead to significant costs as organizations may need to add more storage nodes solely to accommodate metadata requirements, even if additional storage capacity isn't needed. The challenge lies in the taxing aspect of managing both small and large objects efficiently. On average, the metadata space for objects ranges from 1.3 to 2 KB, regardless of object size. While this variability is common across platforms, it poses specific challenges within StorageGRID. Managing small object transactional records stored as objects creates pain points within storage groups. One key improvement I'd like to see in StorageGRID is enhanced visibility for management purposes. For instance, tracking delete markers, which is a standard mechanism, becomes challenging when bucket versioning is enabled. Currently, there's a lack of visibility in this area, unlike what is offered by AWS. However, I'm aware that product enhancements are underway to address this limitation. While StorageGRID's documentation is comprehensive in some aspects, it could be stronger in providing details on certain events and metrics.

Read full review

Engineerd3fd

Engineering Manager at BAE Systems

Feb 22, 2021

We are able to dynamically grow storage at a lower cost

The file access needs improvement. The NFS was rolled out as a single service. It needs to be fully integrated into the proxy in a highly available fashion, like the regular proxy access is. I know it's on the roadmap. With some of the hierarchy, old management storage policies, I would like to be able to move data between different types of storage policies. One of the things that has come up before was being able to do distributed erasure coding. Right now, erasure coding is only supported locally redundant. Products, like Scality, support the ability using multiple rings to do erasure coding that's globally redundant.

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

"The technical support is good."

"It improves our operational efficiency."

"The backup features are valuable. I've heard from our backup and data protection people that our clients are very satisfied with the performance in junction with the backup, which they archive on this type of object storage."

"The ability to get to the StorageGRID from anywhere on my network. The solution is remote. You don't have to be at a physical location."

"It has improved our operational efficiency through time consumption and logistics by 40 to 50 percent. Everything that had to do with our legacy tape solution has been improved and is now more efficient."

"StorageGRID is designed for cloud-based, highly scalable storage. Think big names like service providers like Google who need massive storage volumes with scalability. It also offers cloud-enabled storage capabilities with cloud management functionality. So, if you prioritize scalability and cloud integration, StorageGRID is the way to go. Its object-based storage is built specifically for that purpose."

"It has enabled us to save money on storage costs. We removed our tape library."

"The technical support team is reliable and responsive."

More NetApp StorageGRID pros

"The graphs are most valuable. They have a lot of graphs and reports that you can run to see what's happening in the background to configure OpenStack Swift."

"The general consensus on what we've done is that the restores coming back from it have been faster than they were from our prior vendor. Ingest speeds are fine. The restore speeds have improved."

"The SwiftStack Controller, which is the web UI, provides out of band management. This has been one of the best features of it. It allows us to be able to do upgrades and look at performance metrics. It is a top feature and reason to choose the product."

"In terms of the hardware flexibility, with SwiftStack not being a hardware company, I literally buy any hardware that's the least expensive, from any vendor... from a flexibility standpoint, I think it's fantastic. I can go to anybody, anywhere - any vendor - and get my hardware."

"The scalability is phenomenal. It seems infinite, as long as you put enough storage in place, add enough nodes."

"The performance is good. It is a secondary storage platform designed for archive and backup, so performance for the right use cases is very good. We have been pretty happy in that regard."

"The most valuable feature is its versatility. We use 1space and we can use it for almost anything: for our cloud service, for backups of VMs."

"The biggest feature, the biggest reason we went with SwiftStack, rather than deploying our own model with OpenStack Swift, was their deployment model. That was really the primary point in our purchase decision, back when we initially deployed. It took my installation time from days to hours, for deployment in our environment, versus deploying OpenStack Swift ourselves, manually."

More SwiftStack [EOL] pros

Cons

"Data retrieval speed could be better."

"The integration with more apps has room for improvement."

"The redundancy and reliability are great, but I also see room for improvement there. I would like to see more efficiency in the storage and dedupe/compression solutions."

"We want to move towards Azure in the cloud. Right now, the system is all physical."

"One key improvement I'd like to see in StorageGRID is enhanced visibility for management purposes."

"I just recommend improving the marketing campaigns in Pakistan."

"I would like to see them integrate more with the monitoring platforms. It is a bit difficult to get automated monitoring of the system."

"It has its quirks here and there, but it is an older NetApp system."

More NetApp StorageGRID cons

"It's very well done for what it's supposed to do, and I don't have anything to add, but I would like them to keep it available to the public. SwiftStack is going out of the market. NVIDIA purchased SwiftStack a couple of years ago, and they won't be making it available to the public anymore. Our license is up to March 31st."

"[One] thing that I've been looking for, for years as an end user and customer, for any object store, including SwiftStack, is some type of automated method for data archiving. Something where you would have a metadata tagging policy engine and a data mover all built into a single system that would automatically be able to take your data off your primary and put it into an object store in a non-proprietary way - which is key."

"On the controller features, there needs to be a bit more clean up of the user interface. There are a lot of options available on the GUI which might be better organized or compartmentalized. There are times when you are going through the user interface and you have to look around for where the setting may be. A little bit more attention to the organization of the user interface would be helpful."

"The file access needs improvement. The NFS was rolled out as a single service. It needs to be fully integrated into the proxy in a highly available fashion, like the regular proxy access is. I know it's on the roadmap."

"I would like to see better client integrations, support for a broader client library. SwiftStack could be a little bit more involved in the client side: Python, Java, C, etc."

"They should provide a more concise hardware calculator when you're putting your capacity together."

"The biggest room for improvement is the maturity of the proxyFS solution. That piece of code is relatively new, so most of our issues have been around the proxyFS."

"At the moment we are using Erasure coding in an 8+4 setting. What would be nice is if, for some standard configurations like 15+4 and 8+4, there were more versatility so we could, for example, select 8+6, or the like."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We save money on storage costs from this solution since it allows us to have a source of revenue from customers consuming the service."

"The pricing of StorageGRID falls within the typical range for enterprise-grade solutions and is comparable to other vendors such as Dell, NetApp, and Pure Storage."

"The price is attractive."

"Creating your own data stores, backups, or storage grids, helps eliminate all these costs of downloading all the data back after you downloaded to the cloud."

"We chose NetApp because of price and performance."

"The licensing that the S3 service provides them from a FabricPool standpoint is more attractive than the licensing from AWS or Azure."

"Buying the solution is expensive, but it saves you money down the line when you factor in the logistics of not having to buy tapes."

"I rate the product pricing around five out of ten—it's negotiable, depending on the circumstances."

More NetApp StorageGRID pricing and cost advice

"COST_SAVING; We have had a 40 to 50 percent reduction in CAPEX on the acquisition of new hardware, which is probably conservative."

"It's pricey for us because we're a nonprofit. I'm not privy to any amount or cost, but I have been told that it is pricey. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees, and it seems to come with the support."

"All in, with hardware and everything else - and I hate to say a dollar amount because it's been awhile since I computed it - I know I'm under the $300 to $500 per terabyte mark. I call that my "all in" price, which has replications built in and protections built in."

"The pricing model is great and makes sense. We have talked about how to get into more of a frequent billing cycle than once a year. That would be an interesting concept to add into the product, having the ability to have monthly billing instead of having to do a one-year licensing renewal. However, the way the license works by charging for storage consumed is definitely what makes them the most competitive."

"We are able to dynamically grow storage at a lower cost. We can repurpose hardware and buy commodity hardware. There is a huge cost savings, on average $100,000 a year compared to traditional storage for what we have at our size."

"Dollar per gigabyte, it costs us more because we are storing more. However, if you look at it from a cost per gigabyte perspective, we have dropped our costs significantly."

"We find the pricing rather steep. Of course, you get quality for your money, that's absolutely true... [But] when you look at the prices of the licensing and the prices of your hardware, it's quite substantial."

"The annual support and maintenance costs compared to our old solution for backups had about a two-thirds savings, so about a 60% annual savings on our support and maintenance contract. That savings funded additional expansion for what it was costing us for the support and maintenance contracts on old solution."

More SwiftStack [EOL] 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

802,829 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

20%

Financial Services Firm

20%

Computer Software Company

18%

Government

Computer Software Company

19%

Manufacturing Company

19%

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 NetApp StorageGRID?

The management portals have most significantly improved our data retrieval times. They've made it much easier to restore data compared to our previous methods.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp StorageGRID?

I rate the product pricing around five out of ten—it's negotiable, depending on the circumstances.

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetApp StorageGRID?

The product's continual innovation and enhancement in integration capabilities with other NetApp solutions could be better.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

MinIO vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 26% of the time

Dell ECS vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 26% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 23% of the time

Scality RING vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 7% of the time

Cloudian HyperStore vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 5% of the time

More NetApp StorageGRID Competitors

MinIO vs SwiftStack [EOL]

Compared 58% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs SwiftStack [EOL]

Compared 19% of the time

Dell ECS vs SwiftStack [EOL]

Compared 19% of the time

Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) vs SwiftStack [EOL]

Compared 4% of the time

More SwiftStack [EOL] Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID

August 2024

Download NetApp StorageGRID product report

Buyer's Guide

SwiftStack [EOL]

August 2024

Download SwiftStack [EOL] product report

Also Known As

Storage GRID

No data available

Learn More

NetApp

Video not available

NVIDIA

Overview

Store and manage unstructured data at scale using NetApp StorageGRID for secure, durable object storage. Place content in the right location, at the right time, and on the right storage tier, optimizing workflows and reducing overall costs for globally distributed rich media.

SwiftStack focuses on handling large-scale unstructured data, providing software-defined storage, and boosting data scalability and durability.

SwiftStack is known for its proficiency in object storage, seamless workflow integration, and robust support for multi-cloud environments. Its architecture ensures high-performance data access, making it ideal for big data analytics, media asset management, and backup tasks. Users value its flexibility, ease of integration, and strong performance. The solution's high availability and efficient storage capabilities contribute to its strengths. However, areas needing improvement include customer support response time, initial setup guidance, and enhanced scalability during high-demand periods.

What are SwiftStack's Most Important Features?

Robust Scalability: Easily manages growing data volumes
Multi-cloud Support: Seamless integration across cloud environments
Seamless Data Management: Efficiently handles large datasets
High Availability: Ensures data is accessible whenever needed
Open-Source: Customizable and flexible with extensive API support

What Benefits Should Users Look For?

Enhanced Performance: Handles demanding workloads efficiently
Easy Integration: Adapts well with existing systems and workflows
High Durability: Ensures long-term data storage and protection
Cost-Effectiveness: Reduces overall storage costs
Scalability: Grows with organizational needs

In industries like media management and big data analytics, SwiftStack’s capabilities in high-performance data access and multi-cloud support facilitate efficient data handling. Backup and archival solutions also benefit from its robust storage and high availability features.

Sample Customers

ASE, DARZ GmbH

Pac-12 Networks, Georgia Institute of Technology, Budd Van Lines

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID vs. SwiftStack [EOL]

September 2024

Free Report: NetApp StorageGRID vs. SwiftStack [EOL]

Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp StorageGRID vs. SwiftStack [EOL] and other solutions. Updated: September 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

802,829 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our NetApp StorageGRID vs. SwiftStack [EOL] 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.