Portworx Enterprise vs SwiftStack comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Portworx Enterprise and SwiftStack based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Software Defined Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Portworx Enterprise vs. SwiftStack Report (Updated: January 2023).
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"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.""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.""The solution is user-friendly.""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.""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."

More Portworx Enterprise Pros →

"SwiftStack is also quite flexible when it comes to hardware. It depends, of course, on the use case and the kind of hardware you want to buy. But you have quite a bit of choice in hardware. The SwiftStack software itself does not impose anything on you.""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.""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 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.""It has helped us with the ability to distribute data to different data centers. As part of our DR strategy, we have nodes automatically replicating data from one data center to the other. This makes it easier for us to not have to shift tapes around.""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.""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 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."

More SwiftStack Pros →

Cons
"It would be highly advantageous to include an integrated backup solution within the same license, rather than purchasing backup separately.""I think the vendor could provide more training for new users who may not be familiar with containers.""The documentation could be better.""I would like to see a more native mapping to mainframe-type systems.""The integration has room for improvement.""They have not integrated Portworx with Ondat since they are too focused now on Pure Storage APIs and not on users like us."

More Portworx Enterprise Cons →

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

More SwiftStack Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • "The price is competitive, but it is too expensive when paired with Red Hat IBM."
  • More Portworx Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "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."
  • "One of their advantages of being a commercial open source platform is, for the scale that they offer, the pricing is pretty competitive."
  • "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."
  • "The pricing and licensing are capacity-based, so it's hard to put my finger on them, because so many different vendors charge in different ways. We are still saving significantly over any of the other options that we evaluated because we can choose the best hardware at the best price, then put SwiftStack software on it. So, it's hard to complain, even though a part of me goes, "It would be nicer if it were less expensive.""
  • "We have had a 40 to 50 percent reduction in CAPEX on the acquisition of new hardware, which is probably conservative."
  • "COST_SAVING; We have had a 40 to 50 percent reduction in CAPEX on the acquisition of new hardware, which is probably conservative."
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • More SwiftStack Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Software Defined Storage solutions are best for your needs.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: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.
    Top Answer:The price is competitive, but it is too expensive when paired with Red Hat IBM.
    Top Answer: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 to… more »
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Ranking
    Views
    704
    Comparisons
    513
    Reviews
    4
    Average Words per Review
    523
    Rating
    8.8
    17th
    Views
    1,148
    Comparisons
    966
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Comparisons
    Learn More
    NVIDIA
    Video Not Available
    Overview

    Portworx is the solution for running stateful containers in production, designed with DevOps in mind. With Portworx, users can manage any database or stateful service on any infrastructure using any container scheduler, including Kubernetes, Mesosphere DC/OS, and Docker Swarm. Portworx solves the five most common problems DevOps teams encounter when running stateful services in production: persistence, high availability, data automation, security, and support for multiple data stores and infrastructure.

    SwiftStack enables you to do more with storage. Store more data, enable more applications and serve more users. We do this by delivering a proven object storage solution that's built on an open-source core and is fully enterprise ready. Our object storage software is an alternative to complex, expensive, on-premises hardware-based storage solutions. SwiftStack delivers the features and flexibility you need to easily manage and scale object storage behind your firewall. Customers are demanding storage where they can pay as they grow, find it is easier to consume, and can infinitely scale. Today, our customers use SwiftStack for archiving active data, serving web content, building private clouds, sharing documents and storing backups.
    Sample Customers
    NIO, GE Digital, DreamWorks Animation, Lufthansa, beco, NEW CONTEXT
    Pac-12 Networks, Georgia Institute of Technology, Budd Van Lines
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Retailer7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Manufacturing Company16%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Government8%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise72%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business43%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise70%
    Buyer's Guide
    Portworx Enterprise vs. SwiftStack
    January 2023
    Find out what your peers are saying about Portworx Enterprise vs. SwiftStack and other solutions. Updated: January 2023.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Portworx Enterprise is ranked 2nd in Cloud Software Defined Storage with 6 reviews while SwiftStack is ranked 17th in File and Object Storage. Portworx Enterprise is rated 9.0, while SwiftStack is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Portworx Enterprise writes "A solution backed by strong customer support, that is stable and scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SwiftStack writes "It has helped us with the ability to distribute data to different data centers". Portworx Enterprise is most compared with Red Hat Openshift Data Foundation, Red Hat Ceph Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, IBM Spectrum Scale and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), whereas SwiftStack is most compared with MinIO, Dell ECS, Red Hat Ceph Storage, Cloudian HyperStore and Scality RING. See our Portworx Enterprise vs. SwiftStack report.

    See our list of best Cloud Software Defined Storage vendors.

    We monitor all Cloud Software Defined 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.