Portfolio Comparison
All storage offerings in one matrix
Cost, $/TB, capacity, IOPS, latency, bandwidth, efficiency, and resilience for every IBM solution and competitor — from the same canonical fact table.
Solution Portfolio Matrix
21 solutions · 28 workloads · best-in-column highlighted
| Solution | Vendor | Type | Spend | $/TB Eff. | Raw TB | Eff. TB | IOPS | Latency | BW (Gbps) | Dedup | Resil. | ROI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FlashSystem | IBM | All-Flash NVMe Array | $1.66M | $2.37 | 200 | 700 | 730,000 | 0.4 | 52 | 2.1× | 78 | -98% |
| DS8000 | IBM | Enterprise Disk / Mainframe | $2.10M | $6.12 | 300 | 344 | 300,000 | 0.9 | 40 | 1.0× | 94 | -97% |
| Storage Tape | IBM | Tape Library | $0.31M | $0.02 | 8,000 | 20,250 | — | — | 4 | 1.0× | 78 | -64% |
| Storage Scale | IBM | Software-Defined File | $0.98M | $0.42 | 1,300 | 2,342 | 100,000 | 2.3 | 64 | 1.4× | 69 | -97% |
| Scale System 6000 | IBM | AI/HPC Data Platform | $0.70M | $0.73 | 600 | 950 | 90,000 | 1.5 | 340 | 1.1× | 82 | -96% |
| Storage Ceph | IBM | Software-Defined Object | $0.70M | $0.65 | 700 | 1,066 | 50,000 | 3.3 | 36 | 1.2× | 63 | -99% |
| Cloud Object Storage | IBM | Hyperscale Object Storage | $0.41M | $0.04 | 10,000 | 10,000 | — | — | 22 | 1.0× | 71 | -73% |
| Storage Defender | IBM | Cyber Resilience | $0.24M | $2.50 | 100 | 96 | 10,000 | 5.0 | 8 | 1.0× | 98 | -87% |
| Storage Fusion | IBM | Container-Native | $0.39M | $2.44 | 80 | 161 | 200,000 | 0.4 | 24 | 1.4× | 88 | -95% |
| Storage Protect | IBM | Backup & Recovery | $0.49M | $0.02 | 2,800 | 19,840 | 8,000 | 9.0 | 20 | 4.5× | 80 | -88% |
| SAN Volume Controller | IBM | Heterogeneous Virtualization | $0.31M | $0.40 | 300 | 768 | 220,000 | 0.6 | 28 | 1.6× | 80 | -93% |
| Dell PowerMax | Competitor | All-Flash Array | $1.23M | $3.42 | 150 | 360 | 400,000 | 0.4 | 28 | 1.5× | 80 | -98% |
| NetApp AFF | Competitor | All-Flash NAS | $0.95M | $1.93 | 100 | 493 | 300,000 | 0.5 | 24 | 2.8× | 72 | -99% |
| Pure FlashArray | Competitor | All-Flash Array | $0.86M | $1.59 | 90 | 540 | 350,000 | 0.3 | 26 | 3.0× | 82 | -98% |
| HPE Alletra | Competitor | Midrange Array | $0.54M | $3.13 | 60 | 173 | 150,000 | 0.8 | 16 | 2.0× | 68 | -99% |
| Hitachi VSP | Competitor | Enterprise Array | $1.05M | $4.00 | 140 | 262 | 320,000 | 0.5 | 24 | 1.3× | 85 | -98% |
| AWS EBS | Competitor | Cloud Block | $0.81M | $10.12 | 80 | 80 | 260,000 | 0.5 | 20 | 1.0× | 65 | -99% |
| AWS S3 | Competitor | Cloud Object | $0.37M | $0.07 | 5,000 | 5,000 | — | — | 10 | 1.0× | 70 | -84% |
| Azure Blob | Competitor | Cloud Object | $0.32M | $0.08 | 4,000 | 4,000 | — | — | 8 | 1.0× | 68 | -85% |
| GCP Cloud Storage | Competitor | Cloud Object | $0.26M | $0.09 | 3,000 | 3,000 | — | — | 6 | 1.0× | 65 | -89% |
| NetApp Files (Cloud) | Competitor | Hyperscaler File | $0.63M | $1.47 | 120 | 432 | 80,000 | 1.5 | 16 | 2.0× | 68 | -99% |
Vendor Summary
Aggregate IBM vs competitor footprint
IBM Spend
$8.28M
24,380 TB raw · -94% ROI
Competitor Spend
$7.02M
12,740 TB raw · -97% ROI
IBM Solutions
11
of 21 total solutions
Portfolio ROI
-95%
$15.31M spend → $0.73M value