File Storage · head to head
Ceph vs UrBackup
Ceph
File Storage
Open source distributed storage providing object, block and file from one cluster
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
UrBackup
Backup
Open source client server backup doing both file and whole disk image backups of Windows machines
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Ceph ceph assumes an operator who understands placement groups, CRUSH rules and recovery tuning, so organisations without dedicated storage staff routinely end up with a cluster that works until the first failure and then does not.; UrBackup backups are stored on the server without encryption at rest by default, so the backup server holds a readable copy of every machine it protects and becomes the highest value target on the network.
- They diverge on capability: Ceph covers RADOS object store, UrBackup covers Windows image backups.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Ceph and UrBackup actually diverge.
Identical on both: starting price (Free), pricing model (Open source, no licence fee), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated).
What each one covers
Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.
Only in Ceph
- RADOS object store
- RADOS Gateway
- RBD block devices
- CephFS
- CRUSH placement
- Erasure coded pools
Only in UrBackup
- Windows image backups
- File backups
- Web interface
- Client discovery
- Internet mode
- Filesystem deduplication
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Ceph
- Backing a private cloud where virtual machine disks, shared filesystems and an S3 endpoint all need the same hardwarenot UrBackup
- Growing past the point where a proprietary array upgrade costs more than a rack of commodity serversnot UrBackup
- Research and media environments with petabytes of data and staff who can operate storagenot UrBackup
- Providing an S3 endpoint on premises with multi site replication under your own controlnot UrBackup
UrBackup
- A small office with Windows workstations that needs bare metal restore without per seat licensingnot Ceph
- Schools and labs where machines are re-imaged often and a known good image must be recoverablenot Ceph
- Backing up a mixed fleet to one server on premises with a web interface non specialists can usenot Ceph
- Replacing an expiring commercial endpoint backup licence where the budget is the constraintnot Ceph
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Ceph
- Ceph assumes an operator who understands placement groups, CRUSH rules and recovery tuning, so organisations without dedicated storage staff routinely end up with a cluster that works until the first failure and then does not.
- Small clusters are inefficient: three way replication means a third of raw capacity is usable, and erasure coding needs enough failure domains to be safe, so the economics only work above a certain size.
- Recovery and rebalancing generate heavy internal traffic, so a failed disk can degrade client latency across the cluster unless backfill is throttled correctly beforehand.
- Upgrades must follow a strict daemon order across monitors, managers, OSDs and gateways, and a mistake in that order on a live cluster is difficult to reverse.
- Because it is self hosted, every byte served to the internet is transit you pay for on your own links, so the free licence does not mean free egress and bandwidth planning becomes your problem rather than the providers.
UrBackup
- Backups are stored on the server without encryption at rest by default, so the backup server holds a readable copy of every machine it protects and becomes the highest value target on the network.
- Deduplication relies on filesystem features such as hard links, btrfs or ZFS, so a server built on the wrong filesystem silently consumes far more space and the fix is a rebuild rather than a setting.
- There is no native object storage target, so offsite copies mean replicating the server storage with another tool rather than backing up to a bucket directly.
- Restoring a full Windows image requires booting a restore environment, which is a manual, on site procedure that needs to be rehearsed before the day it is needed.
- A single server holds everything and there is no built in clustering, so its own failure removes every recovery point at once unless you have separately solved replication.
Pricing, plan by plan
Ceph
Free- CephFree
- Full functionality, no capacity limit
- Object, block and file interfaces
- Community support via mailing list and Slack
UrBackup
Free- UrBackupFree
- Full functionality, unlimited clients
- File and image backups
- Web administration interface
Which should you pick?
Choose Ceph if
- You need rados object store.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux.
- You also want rados gateway.
Choose UrBackup if
- You need windows image backups.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux, Windows, macOS, FreeBSD.
- You also want file backups.
Questions people ask
- Is Ceph or UrBackup better?
- Neither clearly leads. Ceph starts at Free and UrBackup at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Ceph or UrBackup?
- Ceph starts at Free and UrBackup at Free.
- Does Ceph or UrBackup run on more platforms?
- Ceph runs on Linux. UrBackup runs on Linux, Windows, macOS, FreeBSD.
- Can I use Ceph for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is Ceph best used for?
- Ceph is most often used for backing a private cloud where virtual machine disks, shared filesystems and an s3 endpoint all need the same hardware, growing past the point where a proprietary array upgrade costs more than a rack of commodity servers, research and media environments with petabytes of data and staff who can operate storage, providing an s3 endpoint on premises with multi site replication under your own control. Of those, backing a private cloud where virtual machine disks, shared filesystems and an s3 endpoint all need the same hardware and growing past the point where a proprietary array upgrade costs more than a rack of commodity servers are not what UrBackup is typically brought in for.
- What can Ceph do that UrBackup cannot?
- Ceph covers RADOS object store, RADOS Gateway, RBD block devices, CephFS. UrBackup covers Windows image backups, File backups, Web interface, Client discovery.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Ceph: How many nodes do I need to start?
Three is the practical minimum for a replicated cluster with real fault tolerance, and most production advice starts at five once you account for maintenance windows.
UrBackup: Does it back up Linux servers as well?
File backups yes, image backups no. The image path is Windows only through volume shadow copy.
Ceph: Is it faster than a SAN?
Not on single stream latency. It wins on aggregate throughput and on growing without a forklift upgrade, which is a different property from raw speed.
UrBackup: Is the data encrypted?
Transport can be encrypted, and there is optional client side file encryption, but the default server storage is not encrypted at rest. Use full disk encryption on the server.
Ceph: Can I buy support?
Yes. IBM sells IBM Storage Ceph and SUSE and others have offered supported builds; the upstream project itself is free.
UrBackup: Can I back up to Amazon S3?
Not directly. The server writes to local or mounted storage, so cloud copies are made by replicating that storage separately.
Ceph: Should I use it just for S3?
If object is all you need, a dedicated object store is simpler to run. Ceph earns its complexity when you need block and file as well.
UrBackup: How many clients can one server handle?
Dozens is routine on decent hardware. The limit is usually storage input and output during overlapping backup windows rather than client count.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Ceph vs MinIO
- Ceph vs Panzura
- Ceph vs Scality RING
- Ceph vs VAST Data
- Ceph vs Backblaze
- Ceph vs Duplicati
- Ceph vs Storj
- Ceph vs Tigris
- Ceph vs Cloudflare R2
- Ceph vs Cloudian
- Ceph vs IDrive e2
- Ceph vs TrueNAS
- Ceph vs LucidLink
- Ceph vs pCloud
- Ceph vs Sync.com
- Ceph vs Bacula
- Ceph vs Velero
- Ceph vs Kopia
- Ceph vs Proxmox Backup Server
- Ceph vs Clonezilla
- Ceph vs Amanda Enterprise
- Ceph vs rustic
- Ceph vs BDRShield
- Ceph vs Acronis Cyber Protect
- Ceph vs Borg Backup
- Ceph vs Restic
- Ceph vs Clumio
- Ceph vs Cohesity
- Ceph vs Dell EMC NetWorker
- Ceph vs Bacula Enterprise
- UrBackup vs MinIO
- UrBackup vs Panzura
- UrBackup vs Scality RING
- UrBackup vs VAST Data
- UrBackup vs Backblaze
- UrBackup vs Duplicati
- UrBackup vs Storj
- UrBackup vs Tigris
- UrBackup vs Cloudflare R2
- UrBackup vs Cloudian
- UrBackup vs IDrive e2
- UrBackup vs TrueNAS
- UrBackup vs LucidLink
- UrBackup vs pCloud
- UrBackup vs Sync.com
- UrBackup vs Bacula
- UrBackup vs Velero
- UrBackup vs Kopia
- UrBackup vs Proxmox Backup Server
- UrBackup vs Clonezilla
- UrBackup vs Amanda Enterprise
- UrBackup vs rustic
- UrBackup vs BDRShield
- UrBackup vs Acronis Cyber Protect
- UrBackup vs Borg Backup
- UrBackup vs Restic
- UrBackup vs Clumio
- UrBackup vs Cohesity
- UrBackup vs Dell EMC NetWorker
- UrBackup vs Bacula Enterprise