MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

MinIO and Red Hat are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. MinIO is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0, while Red Hat is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.8. MinIO holds a 17.4% mindshare in FaOS, compared to Red Hat’s 16.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of MinIO users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 82% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Sponsored

Ranking in File and Object Storage

8th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

All-Flash Storage (16th), Software Defined Storage (SDS) (8th)

MinIO

Ranking in File and Object Storage

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

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

Ranking in other categories

Software Defined Storage (SDS) (2nd)

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2025, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.6%, down from 6.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MinIO is 17.4%, down from 22.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 16.7%, down from 22.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage	16.7%
MinIO	17.4%
Pure Storage FlashBlade	5.6%
Other	60.300000000000004%

File and Object Storage

Q&A Highlights

Netanya Carmi

Content Manager at PeerSpot

Nov 07, 2021

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, easy replacement of failed hard drives, and easy replacement of scaled-out nodes. Red Hat Ceph continues working even when there are failures. We experienced some stability issues when we went beyond the default factor, which is 3. We found that the rebalancing and recovery processes can be a bit slow. Red Hat Ceph can be pretty complex to deploy and has a very big learning curve. MinIO is software-defined, runs in industry-standard hardware, and is an open-source solution. The retrieval of objects with MinIO is significantly better than many of the other solutions we considered. We found deployment to be very simple and even with numerous updates, MinIO ran seamlessly - we experienced no downtime. MinIO is amazing with regard to processing speed, volume, and accessibility to data. It can store large amounts of data, and you can retrieve, load, and transform the data quickly. MinIO offers both a browser interface and a command interface, which we found very useful. MinIO is lacking in a few documentation and monitoring tools that other solutions provide, though. It would be a better and more flexible solution if you could use an uneven disk structure. It would also be great to include some sort of graphical representation of data, like size and data type. Conclusion: We were looking for a high-performance object storage system that would work well with enterprise systems. We found that MinIO offered the stability and scalability in addition to the ability to deploy on-premise, in the cloud, or hybrid options most suitable for our needs.

See all answers

Featured Reviews

MikaelHellström

IT Manager at Regin Dalarna

Has handled backup storage needs reliably and supports seamless upgrades

In environments requiring high throughput and low latency, Pure Storage FlashBlade provides high throughput and normal latency, but we do not have any application that requires low latency right now, so the latency of three to five milliseconds is considered kind of high. Pure Storage FlashBlade's ability to integrate with enterprise applications is not important for us, as we only want to present an S3 bucket for our backup, which we have done, and it works very fast. We use the Purity software's data reduction techniques; we have a backup software that compresses everything before sending it to the S3 bucket, achieving a data reduction of 1.1 to one. I would recommend Pure Storage FlashBlade to other companies because it's a very fast and scalable solution for anyone who needs it. On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution an 8.

Read full review

Abdelrahim-Ahmad

Data Scientist at a tech vendor with 501-1,000 employees

Provides good object storage functionalities

MinIO should provide an easier subscription model for companies that don't have a huge amount of data. Our company has a maximum of 100 terabytes of data. The solution should provide more bugging tools in the open-source version to encourage people to buy the support services. It's not an easy decision. If I go to the management and tell them that I need to buy a service, there should be an easier subscription model for companies that don't have huge amounts of data. For me, getting a subscription for 15,000 a year for a system already in production might be a bit hard. I think MinIO supports a minimum of one petabyte or 100 terabytes of data. Since we don't have such huge amounts of data, buying a subscription for the solution is a bit difficult. Hence, we're only using the open-source version for now. If MinIO becomes really crucial for our business, we could ask the management to get a subscription.

Read full review

Rifat Rahman

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.

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 initial setup is pretty easy and simple."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is performance."

"The main feature I have found to be product replication."

"Pure Storage FlashBlade is user-friendly. It's replication feature is great because it has active replication and active DR. That's the beauty of the product. It's a perfect solution for block storage."

"It has absolutely simplified our storage because the dashboards on the consoles show a clear understanding of where you are, and it is also very easy to provision. This been a big help for our teams."

"The most valuable features are the Metro clustering, and disaster recovery."

"Speed and ease of use are the two most valuable features."

"I would rate Pure Storage FlashBlade a ten out of ten."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"The most valuable feature is the ease of management and administration."

"Very good at object retrieval."

"The initial setup was very easy - one click, and it was installed."

"Saves a lot of time in generating and managing documents."

"It performs efficiently compared to other solutions."

"I like that if you have a problem, you can buy the home server. It is stable and robust."

"The ability to spawn a MinIO Tenant on demand and shut it down right after is most valuable."

"Reliable erasure coding."

More MinIO pros

"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."

"radosgw and librados provide a simple integration with clone, snapshots, and other functions that aid in data integrity."

"The ability to provide block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster is very valuable for us."

"High reliability with commodity hardware."

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

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

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

"It's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"I would like to see more VM-Aware features in the next release of this solution."

"The documentational aspect of FlashBlade needs improvement."

"We initially encountered challenges with the assembly process due to issues with the documentation required during setup, an area where Pure Storage needs improvement."

"It's on the expensive side, as expected for a niche product."

"The features provided for SMB customers are limited."

"Its configuration should be easier."

"I would like to see the licensing fees improved as well as the price per terabytes."

"The feature that we're waiting on is better integration with the cell services."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"The product's initial setup phase is complex."

"Lacks documentation for non-Kubernetes users."

"We had minor bugs occasionally."

"The Distributed User Interface (DUI) needs some work. It's hard to view a large set of data on the DUI. It's an issue with the DUI's performance."

"Documentation could be improved."

"The tool’s pricing needs to improve. We also encountered challenges while deploying the tool in Kubernetes. The documentation also was not too great. We have currently deployed the solution in a stand-alone fashion."

"The main issue we face with MinIO is performance."

"The monitoring capability is really bad and needs to be improved."

More MinIO cons

"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."

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

"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."

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

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

"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."

"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

"It is within reason for what you get. From what we have found comparing it to other vendors, it is in the same range as others. Given the choice, we would definitely redeploy it based on the cost."

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

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

"It's a costly solution, but Pure Storage FlashBlade doesn't require additional licenses. All of the software is combined into one bundle."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"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 product is very expensive."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"We use the solution's open-source version."

"My company hasn't tried the version of the solution where we need to pay to use it."

"MinIO is a free open-source solution."

"This solution is open source so it is free."

"This is an open-source solution but I am using the licensed version."

"We never used the paid support."

"There is no cost for software."

"The price of this product isn't high."

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

"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 price of Red Hat Ceph Storage is reasonable."

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

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

875,455 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

17%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Educational Organization

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	21

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	9

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	13
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	15

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashBlade?

Regarding pricing, it is okay; we needed exactly this in size, and the price was a lot lower than competitors, making...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?

In my opinion, one way Pure Storage FlashBlade can be improved is by having more compatibility between the FlashArray...

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 ...

See all answers

What do you like most about MinIO?

I like that if you have a problem, you can buy the home server. It is stable and robust.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for MinIO?

We use the solution's open-source version.

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?

Areas of Red Hat Ceph Storage that have room for improvement include more promotion. Many people do not know about th...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat Ceph Storage?

I do not have experience working with solutions such as Red Hat Ceph Storage and StorPool. I have plenty of experienc...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 18% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 11% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 6% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 5% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 4% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

NetApp StorageGRID vs MinIO

Compared 8% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs MinIO

Compared 4% of the time

Cloudian HyperStore vs MinIO

Compared 4% of the time

VAST Data vs MinIO

Compared 4% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs MinIO

Compared 3% of the time

More MinIO Competitors

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 5% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 4% of the time

Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

Dell PowerFlex vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 2% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

November 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

MinIO

November 2025

Download MinIO product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

November 2025

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

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

MinIO is an open-source object storage system. It is designed to efficiently store and retrieve unstructured data, such as photos, videos, and backups. MinIO can be used as a standalone object storage server or as part of a larger system, such as a data lake or a private cloud, and can be deployed on-premise, in the cloud, or in a hybrid environment, making it a flexible storage solution for a variety of use cases.

MinIO’s features include erasure coding, bitrot protection, and checksum validation, which help ensure data integrity and reliability. The solution’s multi-tenancy support makes it ideal for multi-user environments. MinIO’s edge computing tools enable data storage and processing closer to users' locations, reducing latency and improving performance. MinIO can easily scale to accommodate storage and power demands, making it ideal for use in large-scale, data-intensive environments.

MinIO Benefits and Features:

MinIO offers several key benefits and features for organizations looking for a scalable and high-performing object storage solution:

Scalability: Horizontally scale to increase storage space and processing power as your needs grow.

High performance: MinIO’s edge computing and low latency provide fast data access.

Seamless integrations: MinIO is compatible with the Amazon S3 API, which enables integration with third-party systems and tools.

Data integrity: Security features, such as erasure coding, bitrot protection, and checksum validation, ensure data integrity and reliability.

Reduced costs: MinIO is an open-source solution, making it a cost-effective option for organizations looking for a scalable object storage solution.

Support: MinIO’s large open-source community of developers and users provides a wide range of resources and an active support network

Multi-tenancy: Multi-tenancy support makes MinIO suitable for use in multi-user environments.

Easy deployment: MinIO is easy to deploy and can run on a variety of platforms, including on-premise, in the cloud, or in a hybrid environment.

Access control: Role-based access control, enabling you to control access to data based on users permissions.

Event notifications: Automate workflows based on changes to objects in your storage.

Cross-region replication: Duplicate data between different regions for disaster recovery and data backup.

Intuitive interface: MinIO’s user-friendly dashboard can be accessed via any browser and can be used to perform multiple object operations including object creation and management.

Reviews from Real Users

MinIO stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Several major ones are its flexibility, integration options, and performance.

Süleyman Fazıl Y., a senior software engineer at a tech services company, writes, “The most valuable features are that MinIO is open, it works on-premise, and is compatible with the Amazon industry which is great for finding compatible libraries in many languages which is very good for developers.”

Rebecca S., CTO at NIASE, says, “MinIO is much improved over the prior solution, updates are simple to apply, and we anticipate that future capacity requirements will be easier to meet. Our customers are using this solution to retrieve tens of thousands of objects (documents and files) per hour, and MinIO seems to be able to keep up with it.”

MinIO

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

Information Not Available

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

November 2025

Free Report: MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

Find out what your peers are saying about MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: November 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

875,455 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our MinIO 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.