The Hidden Costs of Rubrik’s Box-Based Approach vs. Commvault’s True Cloud Data Security Platform

When evaluating enterprise cyber resilience solutions, organizations face an important architectural choice between appliance-based approaches like Rubrik’s and software-defined platforms like Commvault’s.

While both vendors provide data protection capabilities, different architectural approaches create distinct cost implications that become apparent throughout the lifecycle of the solution.

Architectural Approaches: Box-Based vs. Platform

Rubrik’s Appliance-Centric Model

Rubrik’s approach centers on physical or virtual appliances that serve as the primary deployment model:

• Protection capacity is added in fixed increments through additional appliances.
• Scaling typically requires deploying new appliances when performance or capacity limits are reached.
• Rubrik’s solution uses an appliance-based architecture where data protection capacity comes in predefined sizing options.

Commvault’s Software-Defined Platform

Commvault employs a software-defined modular architecture:

• Deployment options include software-only, reference architectures, converged systems, or cloud-based implementations.
• Resources can be scaled independently and incrementally based on performance or capacity requirements.
• The Commvault platform can be deployed on existing infrastructure, purpose-built appliances, or as a cloud service.

Cost Implications of Architectural Differences

The architectural distinctions between these solutions create several significant cost considerations:

1. Scaling flexibility and efficiency

Appliance-based approaches often require provisioning capacity in predetermined increments, which can lead to overprovisioning when actual needs fall between appliance size options. According to industry analysts, this step-function scaling can result in unused capacity throughout the deployment lifecycle.

Performance and capacity are intertwined. To enhance performance, an additional Rubrik node must be added, which also incurs the cost of extra storage capacity. Similarly, to increase storage capacity, customers must also pay for additional performance resources (CPU, RAM). This results in increased TCO.

Commvault’s platform modular approach enables more precise scaling, allowing organizations to spend as per actual requirements. This helps reduce resource wastage and improves cost efficiency.

2. Cloud integration approach

As organizations adopt cloud services, the architectural approach significantly impacts cloud protection costs:

• Appliance-based solutions often extend their model to the cloud through virtual appliances.[VS1] 
• Appliance-based solutions need to stage data locally before moving them to cloud storages.

Platform approaches may integrate directly with cloud services using native APIs. Commvault offers direct integration with cloud services without requiring virtual appliances, potentially reducing the resources needed for cloud protection.

Total Cost of Ownership Factors

When evaluating total cost of ownership over a three- to five-year period, organizations should consider several key factors:

Cost Category	Appliance Approach Impact	Platform Approach Advantage
Infrastructure costs	Potential overprovisioning	Right-sized deployment
Cloud protection costs	Virtual appliances in each environment	Direct cloud service integration
Scaling costs	Step-function increases	Incremental based on needs
Technology refresh	Full appliance replacement cycles	Component-level updates

Beyond Cost: Capability Considerations

The architectural differences extend beyond cost implications to create capability distinctions:

1. Multi-cloud support

Platform architectures typically provide more consistent capabilities across cloud environments by using a common code base with cloud-specific integration points. This can simplify protection across diverse cloud deployments.

2. Workload coverage

Software-defined platforms often support a broader range of workloads, including legacy systems, specialized applications, and diverse infrastructure types. This can eliminate the need for multiple protection solutions.

3. Security integration

The architectural approach also impacts security capabilities. Commvault’s platform includes integrated security features like threat detection, while appliance-focused solutions may require additional components for comprehensive security. Rubrik’s data security solution is delivery through their SaaS, severely limiting functionality in environments where cloud connectivity is restricted or prohibited, such as dark sites or isolated clusters.

Strategic Architectural Considerations

The choice between Rubrik’s appliance-based approach and Commvault’s platform architecture represents a strategic decision with long-term implications.

Organizations should evaluate these solutions based on their specific requirements, considering not just initial costs but long-term factors like scaling efficiency, operational overhead, cloud integration, and security concerns. By understanding the architectural differences and their cost implications, organizations can make more informed decisions about their cyber resilience investments.