Ceph vs FileBrowser Quantum

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted file sync & storage options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeatureCephFileBrowser Quantum
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseLGPL-2.1Apache-2.0
LanguageC++Go
Setup difficultyHardEasy
Min. RAM4,096 MB128 MB
Deploymentdocker, kubernetes, bare-metaldocker, binary
GitHub stars★ 16,905★ 7,695
First released20062024
ReplacesAmazon S3, Google DriveGoogle Drive, Dropbox

Why pick each one

Choose Ceph if…

  • Released under the LGPL-2.1 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
  • Mature project with 16.9k GitHub stars
Ceph details

Choose FileBrowser Quantum if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 7.7k GitHub stars
FileBrowser Quantum details

Frequently asked questions

Is Ceph or FileBrowser Quantum better?

Neither is universally better. Ceph has the larger community, while FileBrowser Quantum is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Ceph and FileBrowser Quantum free and open-source?

Yes. Ceph is licensed under LGPL-2.1 and FileBrowser Quantum under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Ceph and FileBrowser Quantum with Docker?

Ceph: yes. FileBrowser Quantum: yes.

Related comparisons