No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Tintri VMstore T7000 comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

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

Everpure FlashArray
Sponsored
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
232
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (3rd)
Red Hat Ceph Storage
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined Storage (SDS) (3rd), File and Object Storage (2nd)
Tintri VMstore T7000
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Software Defined Storage (SDS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage9.4%
DataCore SANsymphony6.7%
Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI)6.5%
Other77.4%
Software Defined Storage (SDS)
All-Flash Storage Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tintri VMstore T70002.1%
Dell PowerStore8.0%
NetApp AFF6.9%
Other83.0%
All-Flash Storage
 

Featured Reviews

Sowjanya MV - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at Wipro Limited
Has improved performance for mission-critical workloads and enabled seamless non-disruptive upgrades
The availability is 99.99%, which is the main factor any customer would need because their data should be available whenever they want to access it. This is one main critical thing. It is very easy to upgrade since Pure Storage FlashArray handles it well. Everything is non-disruptive now; previously, there were forklift shifts, but now that is not the case. Pure Storage FlashArray says no to forklift upgrades. Usually hardware requires downtime, but Pure Storage FlashArray has improved their footprint so that they are not asking for downtime; everything is just a non-disruptive activity, which is why customers are more inclined towards Pure Storage FlashArray. Customers want more of the models in their environment due to the performance they are giving, and everything is in one Pure1 Array console where we can view all the models on one page or just an orchestration tool. You don't miss anything; you have replication, notifications about replication, and details about which host groups replication is happening in and if that replication is successful or failed. On a daily basis, our purpose is to create volumes for infrastructure; our daily activities include creating volumes and mapping them to the host, doing any migrations from a VM, clearing the data stores, and carving the volumes to those VMs. One key factor is the data compression with a ratio of 5:1, focusing on space efficiency, inline deduplication, and the compression Pure Storage FlashArray works on; that is a major factor we can suggest to any customer. Analytical capabilities are crucial. Daily, we check the throughput and consumption, and Pure Storage FlashArray provides predictions for one year regarding usage. This prediction helps plan updates well ahead. For support, we just raise a case, and they follow up and get it done. There is also AI readiness, but with the model R2, we don't have much of that AI readiness. For others, we do have AI readiness that predicts capacity based on daily or monthly trends, enabling us to analyze how much space we need or if we need to expand the disk shelf. From an operational point of view, a good feature is that if you accidentally delete a volume, it will be retained in the destroyed state for the next twenty-four hours, which is not the same with any other vendor. I have worked in this storage domain for the past fifteen years, and this option is remarkable, benefiting any L1 or L2 engineer. Additionally, from a compliance perspective, Pure Storage FlashArray has REST APIs enabled. I have not explored automation much, but from a security standpoint, it is strong with encryption data. If you want to automate, you can easily integrate with all clouds and explore Pure Cloud for scheduling workloads, including volume creation. Customers find benefit in Pure Storage FlashArray's single management pane of glass due to the dual controller and active-active setup. If one of the controllers goes down, all workloads automatically shift to the other controller, ensuring their data is safe and accessible at all times. This is a highlighted feature that any customer desires because their data should always be accessible. For SAN workloads, we use Pure Storage FlashArray because for SAN FC fiber channel, we don't use it; we use NetApp for NAS activities. We have clearly split this, so SAN is for mission-critical applications, while network-attached storage handles file systems. This architecture helps us maximize the benefit from Pure Storage FlashArray due to the significant workloads from this giant retail client. From a footprint and energy consumption perspective, you can see energy consumption from the Pure1 storage portal on a daily basis, and it is very compact. The three models we use consume only three units, which is quite low. From a footprint and data center perspective, it doesn't occupy much space. As everything moves to cloud, there are requirements to avoid excess spending on data centers, and Pure Storage FlashArray is efficient in energy consumption and is environmentally friendly.
Rifat Rahman - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Tanesh Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior System Engineer at SiliconSt.
Vm-aware storage has simplified vmware management and delivers strong deduplication and savings
There are many good features for Tintri VMstore T7000, especially its nature of understanding VMware. It is VM-aware storage, which is a very good characteristic. When any VM is moved from one host to another host, there is no way to see where it is running. It is very smooth in action. Trintri VMstore T7000 is totally autonomous. We have integrated it with our virtualization environment, so all the VMs and machines running in our environment move between one Tintri VMstore T7000 and another without requiring any manual intervention. The system can schedule resources from its own capabilities. If one Tintri VMstore T7000 becomes full, the machine will be moved to another automatically. This autonomous system is very beneficial. Nowadays, all storage comes with NVMe flash and all storage is coming with flash storages as well. Tintri VMstore T7000 is much easier to handle. We just need to integrate the whole Tintri VMstore T7000 with vCenter and all the work will be done by vCenter. If we want to check what the deduplication will be, there is a really good feature of Tintri VMstore T7000 called TGC. We can integrate all Tintri VMstore T7000 systems from one end and manage all of them from a single endpoint. The major benefit of using Tintri VMstore T7000 is its deduplication and compression ratio, which is around 4x to 5x. No other storage is giving that much ratio. This is really good and much cost-saving for the company. Administrative cost is reduced because Tintri VMstore T7000 gives us a single point where we can manage it. This is both time-saving and cost-saving.

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 improved our consolidation ratio and it saves us a lot of space."
"It saved a lot of space, as far as physical space in our data center."
"We've been using FlashArray's snapshot for backups. Their replication across sites and response time are also excellent."
"We put a fair amount of stress on it because we run sequel workloads and we run web applications where the same web files are hit over and over, and we have had almost zero stability issues with that SAN, which has been really great for us."
"With Pure Storage FlashArray we have been able to deploy several thousand VDI servers, virtual machines, very quickly and efficiently."
"Because we were able to afford to go all flash, we don't manage the tiers, we're not moving data up, and we're not waiting for overnight cycles."
"We find the ease of usability and setup valuable."
"The Pure Storage customer service is by far the best part of the product and organization."
"Stratus allows more reliability than all the other types of computers available."
"Most valuable features include replication and compression."
"The ability to provide block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster is very valuable for us."
"Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well."
"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."
"Companies that can afford completely flash-based pipe servers should go for Ceph because it's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability."
"Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest."
"Hands down one of the best investments that we have ever done."
"The best feature that Tintri VMstore T7000 offers, in my opinion, is disaster recovery, because having one unit at the production site and one at the DR site, along with the migration of snapshots to the DR site, makes things significantly better and alleviates so much time for me as an admin so I can focus on other things, knowing I can trust Tintri VMstore T7000 to take the snapshot, move it over to DR, and be assured that if I need it, it will work."
"The data encryption feature adds a valuable security enhancement with no impact on performance."
"We´re saving a lot of time and Money due to the lack of complexity."
"Upgrades are super easy and can be done during business hours without interruptions in production."
"It is a set and forget environment with a very good tooling to view performance and delivers the IOPS we need for our VDI environment."
"Its performance is amazing. Since I have put Tintri in, I haven't had a complaint from anybody about slowness. On top of that, there is block-level cloning and the ability to spin up VMs."
"Customer Service: Great. More than great. Reactive, no, proactive, via autosupport."
 

Cons

"There are a lot of things to improve."
"A noticeable area for improvement is the support for object storage."
"There are scenarios with very specific functionality around VMware integration particularly to do with the way we'd like to manage LUNs in VMware. The tools are pretty good but there's room for improvement there."
"Storage. There could be better storage."
"Technical support needs improvement. With respect to them being able to respond, they're more marketing people, less technical."
"The file functionality could be better."
"It needs to improve its price."
"The credentials on the iSCSI interface are only available to type in with the Chrome browser, and not with the Firefox browser."
"Ceph Storage lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication. That is a huge loss in terms of performance."
"Ceph is not a mature product at this time. Guides are misleading and incomplete."
"I've heard the integration with OpenShift is great, however, the licensing cost is excessively high."
"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI."
"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."
"In the deployment step, we need to create some config files to add Ceph functions in OpenStack modules (Nova, Cinder, Glance). It would be useful to have a tool that validates the format of the data in those files, before generating a deploy with failures."
"An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions."
"We need more options to integrate with cloud storage options other than the current AWS and IBM that it currently supports."
"For now we don't have scalability issues, but It would be nice to add an external bay for additional storage space."
"On the software side, I suggest adding integration with backups software like CommVault Simpana or Veeam where these products can integrate with the array and trigger things like snapshots for backup, etc."
"Tintri VMstore T7000 is very expensive. As far as cost-wise considerations go, I rate it very low because it is very expensive compared to other vendors."
"Replication between two VMs needs to be improved to real-time."
"Also, we have noticed that while Tintri has improved our infrastructure performance by 30%, the performance drops significantly if we exceed SSD capacity."
"Stretched Cluster also for older models like T540 and T650."
"I would like to be able to add more storage capacity to our 2 units down the road with out buying an additional seprate array."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are no licensing fees or other costs."
"The price of the solution is not expensive."
"There is always room for negotiation."
"When I last looked, the prices were reasonable, and we could get an excellent array for about $60,000."
"We purchased a license to use this solution and we pay for the storage ourselves."
"When you are paying more than you were paying for the storage space, you'd like the cost to be less. If they could get into the spinning disk kind of cost, that would be it."
"Pure is typically more expensive than everyone else. You get what you pay for, but I have lost deals to similar solutions because of pricing. They include everything, and that's another positive about Pure Storage. They aren't trying to nickel and dime their customers for different features. It is all included in one price. The license is by capacity, and the price depends on the capacity and the discount we're getting from the vendor. You get the SKU of the physical appliance, support, and maintenance, and that's it. You're licensed for whatever feature they offer. It is all rolled up into the price of the appliance."
"There is an annual or perpetual license required for this solution."
"The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure because we own the hardware."
"Most of time, you can get Ceph with the OpenStack solution in a subscription​​ as a bundle.​"
"There is no cost for software."
"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"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 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."
"The price of Red Hat Ceph Storage is reasonable."
"Tintri arrays are cheaper then other vendors while still providing an excellent level of performance."
"It's very competitive."
"It is fairly priced, but it is very important to consider the total cost of ownership over time. The solution has excellent compression and deduplication capabilities, often offering up to three times the raw capacity."
"The cost of all the SW is well spent because it makes you save on backup and DR."
"​I think it is a very good solution. You get a good bang for buck.​"
"Ensure the storage system "natively" supports the protocols that you wish to use (i.e., CIFS) without the need for the overhead of internal "conversion VMs" that run the protocols."
"The price is the price and is reasonable for the class of storage."
"Make sure that you have all licenses in one go. Options afterwards can cost extra."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business73
Midsize Enterprise38
Large Enterprise160
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise27
Large Enterprise23
 

Questions from the Community

Which should I choose: HPE 3PAR StoreServ or Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series?
Both are great platforms, but if you are considering all flash solutions, I would recommend you to consider Pure Stor...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashArray?
When comparing cost, I find that the cost is either the same or slightly higher, but that is returned by the ease of ...
What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashArray?
The only thing I think could be improved is price. The price is the main concern for our customers.
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 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...
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tintri VMstore?
The pricing of Tintri VMstore T7000 is cost-efficient. It is pretty costly as all IT investments in infrastructure ar...
What needs improvement with Tintri VMstore?
One way Tintri VMstore T7000 can be improved is by showing past snapshots that were deleted, providing a history of s...
What is your primary use case for Tintri VMstore?
Our main use case for Tintri VMstore T7000 is hosting a large number of virtual machines, with the capacity to store ...
 

Also Known As

Pure Storage FlashArray
Ceph
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
Dell, DreamHost
That’s why leading enterprises including Comcast, Chevron, NASA, Toyota, United Healthcare and 20% of the Fortune 100, trust Tintri with storage needs.
Find out what your peers are saying about StarWind, Nutanix, Red Hat and others in Software Defined Storage (SDS). Updated: October 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.