Amazon Elastic File System (EFS) vs. Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)
Score 7.2 out of 10
N/A
The Amazon Elastic File System (EFS) provides a simple, scalable, elastic file system for Linux-based workloads for use with AWS Cloud services and on-premises resources.
$0.04
per GB
Amazon S3
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
Amazon S3 is a cloud-based object storage service from Amazon Web Services. It's key features are storage management and monitoring, access management and security, data querying, and data transfer.N/A
Pricing
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Editions & Modules
US East & West Region
$0.043
per month per GB (One zone)
Europe (Ireland) Region
$0.046
per month per GB (One zone)
Asia Pacific & Canada Region
$0.047
per month per GB (One zone)
Africa (Cape Town) Region
$0.054
per month per GB (One zone)
AWS GovCloud (US-East)
$0.056
per month per GB (One zone)
US East & West Region
$0.08
per month per GB (Standard)
Asia Pacific & Canada Region
$0.09
per month per GB (Standard)
Europe (Ireland) Region
$0.09
per month per GB (Standard)
Africa (Cape Town) Region
$0.10
per month per GB (Standard)
AWS GovCloud (US-East)
$0.11
per month per GB (Standard)
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Amazon S3
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsThere is no minimum fee or setup charge. You pay only for the storage you use, for read and write access to data stored in Infrequent Access storage classes, and for any provisioned throughput. Amazon EFS offers four storage classes: two standard storage classes, including Amazon EFS Standard and Amazon EFS Standard-Infrequent Access (EFS Standard-IA), and two One Zone storage classes, including Amazon EFS One Zone and Amazon EFS One Zone-Infrequent Access—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Considered Both Products
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)
Amazon S3
Chose Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
All other alternatives are also good but as our infrastructure was on AWS, Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) was a better choice due to its better integration with other AWS services. It was serving the purpose in an economical way. All of our needs were being fulfilled by …
Chose Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
S3 and EBS/EFS both host files, but they are very different. S3 is great for static files where EBS/EFS are more intended for files that are frequently modified. S3 is also much better for public files like images, videos, HTML/CSS files, and other web resources that are …
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS)
Comparison of Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) features of Product A and Product B
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)
8.8
5 Ratings
8% above category average
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
-
Ratings
Service-level Agreement (SLA) uptime10.05 Ratings00 Ratings
Dynamic scaling10.05 Ratings00 Ratings
Elastic load balancing10.04 Ratings00 Ratings
Pre-configured templates4.04 Ratings00 Ratings
Monitoring tools8.55 Ratings00 Ratings
Pre-defined machine images7.03 Ratings00 Ratings
Operating system support9.55 Ratings00 Ratings
Security controls10.05 Ratings00 Ratings
Automation10.04 Ratings00 Ratings
Data Center Backup
Comparison of Data Center Backup features of Product A and Product B
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)
-
Ratings
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
9.7
2 Ratings
13% above category average
Universal recovery00 Ratings9.52 Ratings
Instant recovery00 Ratings9.52 Ratings
Recovery verification00 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Multiple backup destinations00 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Backup to the cloud00 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Snapshots00 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Flexible deployment00 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Management dashboard00 Ratings7.52 Ratings
Platform support00 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Retention options00 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Encryption00 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Enterprise Backup
Comparison of Enterprise Backup features of Product A and Product B
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)
-
Ratings
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
9.5
2 Ratings
16% above category average
Continuous data protection00 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Replication00 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Operational reporting and analytics00 Ratings8.02 Ratings
Multi-location capabilities00 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Small Businesses
Akamai Cloud Computing
Akamai Cloud Computing
Score 9.0 out of 10
Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage
Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage
Score 9.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.1 out of 10
Bacula Enterprise
Bacula Enterprise
Score 9.7 out of 10
Enterprises
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.1 out of 10
Bacula Enterprise
Bacula Enterprise
Score 9.7 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Likelihood to Recommend
7.5
(5 ratings)
10.0
(68 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
8.1
(10 ratings)
Support Rating
8.0
(1 ratings)
9.8
(21 ratings)
User Testimonials
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Likelihood to Recommend
Amazon AWS
While the idea is to utilize it enterprise wide; it sometimes doesn't work well in smaller applications and that causes slowdowns and impacts productivity. Also when evaluating EFS versus EBS - one needs to look at cost as EFS is a lot more expensive to implement and run so you need to weigh cost benefits of both systems and choose the best for you.
Read full review
Amazon AWS
Amazon S3 is a great service to safely backup your data where redundancy is guaranteed and the cost is fair. We use Amazon S3 for data that we backup and hope we never need to access but in the case of a catastrophic or even small slip of the finger with the delete command we know our data and our client's data is safely backed up by Amazon S3. Transferring data into Amazon S3 is free but transferring data out has an associated, albeit low, cost per GB. This needs to be kept in mind if you plan on transferring out a lot of data frequently. There may be other cost effective options although Amazon S3 prices are really low per GB. Transferring 150TB would cost approximately $50 per month.
Read full review
Pros
Amazon AWS
  • This is very easy to setup and has a great performance.
  • As per the name, Elastic grows as your data grows.
  • We can run multiple EC2 instances.
Read full review
Amazon AWS
  • Fantastic developer API, including AWS command line and library utilities.
  • Strong integration with the AWS ecosystem, especially with regards to access permissions.
  • It's astoundingly stable- you can trust it'll stay online and available for anywhere in the world.
  • Its static website hosting feature is a hidden gem-- it provides perhaps the cheapest, most stable, most high-performing static web hosting available in PaaS.
Read full review
Cons
Amazon AWS
  • For early age start it would be costly
  • Not necessary for small scale system, but very beneficial for system which have high TPS and huge user base
Read full review
Amazon AWS
  • Web console can be very confusing and challenging to use, especially for new users
  • Bucket policies are very flexible, but the composability of the security rules can be very confusing to get right, often leading to security rules in use on buckets other than what you believe they are
Read full review
Usability
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
Amazon AWS
It is tricky to get it all set up correctly with policies and getting the IAM settings right. There is also a lot of lifecycle config you can do in terms of moving data to cold/glacier storage. It is also not to be confused with being a OneDrive or SharePoint replacement, they each have their own place in our environment, and S3 is used more by the IT team and accessed by our PHP applications. It is not necessarily used by an average everyday user for storing their pictures or documents, etc.
Read full review
Support Rating
Amazon AWS
The documentation is sufficient for setting up and it is basic NFS for mounting so not much support is required. I have not had any issues to warrant a request with AWS support.
Read full review
Amazon AWS
AWS has always been quick to resolve any support ticket raised. S3 is no exception. We have only ever used it once to get a clarification regarding the costs involved when data is transferred between S3 and other AWS services or the public internet. We got a response from AWS support team within a day.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Amazon AWS
EFS is easier to configure, no need for Active Directory.
Read full review
Amazon AWS
Overall, we found that Amazon S3 provided a lot of backend features Google Cloud Storage (GCS) simply couldn't compare to. GCS was way more expensive and really did not live up to it. In terms of setup, Google Cloud Storage may have Amazon S3 beat, however, as it is more of a pseudo advanced version of Google Drive, that was not a hard feat for it to achieve. Overall, evaluating GCS, in comparison to S3, was an utter disappointment.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Amazon AWS
  • Cost is always a paramount issue when looking at ROI
  • It is fast and if that's what you need for your implementation - you probably will not find a better solution
  • Expertise in EFS is sometimes hard to come by so it's best to look at your employee's ability to grasp this technology. Otherwise, it's a pretty steep learning curve.
Read full review
Amazon AWS
  • It practically eliminated some real heavy storage servers from our premises and reduced maintenance cost.
  • The excellent durability and reliability make sure the return of money you invested in.
  • If the objects which are not active or stale, one needs to remove them. Those objects keep adding cost to each billing cycle. If you are handling a really big infrastructure, sometimes this creates quite a huge bill for preserving un-necessary objects/documents.
Read full review
ScreenShots