Amazon Elastic File System (EFS) vs. Azure NetApp Files vs. Google Compute Engine

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)
Score 7.5 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
Azure NetApp Files
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Azure NetApp Files is a Microsoft Azure file storage service built on NetApp technology, giving users the file capabilities in Azure that core business applications require, with pricing plans for different performance tiers.
$21,474,836.48
per month
Google Compute Engine
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Google Compute Engine is an infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS) product from Google Cloud. It provides virtual machines with carbon-neutral infrastructure which run on the same data centers that Google itself uses.
$0
per month GB
Pricing
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Azure NetApp FilesGoogle Compute Engine
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)
Restore
$0.02/GiB
per month
Backup
$0.05/GiB
per month
Cross Region Replication Daily - Replication frequency is once a day
$0.11/GiB
per month
Cross Region Replication Hourly - Replication frequency is every 1 hour
$0.12/GiB
per month
Cross Region Replication Minutes - Replication frequency is every 10 mins
$0.14/GiB
per month
Standard Storage
$0.14746 per GiB
per month
Premium Storage
$0.29419 per GiB
per month
Ultra Storage
$0.39274 per GiB
per month
Preemptible Price - Predefined Memory
0.000892 / GB
Hour
Three-year commitment price - Predefined Memory
$0.001907 / GB
Hour
One-year commitment price - Predefined Memory
$0.002669 / GB
Hour
On-demand price - Predefined Memory
$0.004237 / GB
Hour
Preemptible Price - Predefined vCPUs
0.006655 / vCPU
Hour
Three-year commitment price - Predefined vCPUS
$0.014225 / CPU
Hour
One-year commitment price - Predefined vCPUS
$0.019915 / vCPU
Hour
On-demand price - Predefined vCPUS
$0.031611 / vCPU
Hour
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Azure NetApp FilesGoogle Compute Engine
Free Trial
YesYesYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo 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 AccessAzure NetApp Files (ANF) cloud file storage service is charged per hour based on the provisioned ANF capacity. Customers can provision a minimum of 4TiB of ANF capacity and then add additional provision capacity in the increments of 1TiB. Cross Region Replication pricing varies by the desired replication frequency per unit of data, and the region of the destination volume.Prices vary according to region (i.e US central, east, & west time zones). Google Compute Engine also offers a discounted rate for a 1 & 3 year commitment.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Azure NetApp FilesGoogle Compute Engine
Considered Multiple Products
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)

No answer on this topic

Azure NetApp Files
Chose Azure NetApp Files

The solution is amazing. It scales up and down, which is quite unique for a cloud solution and also it is billed to you on a per-hour basis, which provides a great opportunity to save the cost when you don't need it. Compared to others, we really liked that option for Azure …

Chose Azure NetApp Files
Azure NetApp Files is very well integrated with Microsoft Azure, we use the same request methods that everyone knows from Azure. NetApp and Microsoft has built a very efficient solution that allows you to transfer virtually any service to the Microsoft public cloud. Azure …
Chose Azure NetApp Files
We briefly looked at Amazon Elastic File System. From the small amount of research we did, Amazon EFS was comparable, but in the end we already had a NetApp infrastructure and were a Microsoft shop, so melding them together using Azure NetApp Files made sense.
Google Compute Engine
Chose Google Compute Engine
Google Compute Engine is the leader in infrastructure-as-a-service and moving up the stack to everything from the Internet of Things to artificial intelligence. The price is very good. The support is excellent. User-friendly and very customizable solution. Fit great with our …
Features
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Azure NetApp FilesGoogle Compute Engine
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
7% above category average
Azure NetApp Files
7.7
8 Ratings
6% below category average
Google Compute Engine
7.9
66 Ratings
4% below category average
Service-level Agreement (SLA) uptime10.05 Ratings8.18 Ratings8.125 Ratings
Dynamic scaling10.05 Ratings7.18 Ratings7.861 Ratings
Elastic load balancing10.04 Ratings8.17 Ratings9.054 Ratings
Pre-configured templates4.04 Ratings8.07 Ratings9.263 Ratings
Monitoring tools8.55 Ratings7.18 Ratings3.026 Ratings
Pre-defined machine images7.03 Ratings8.06 Ratings9.265 Ratings
Operating system support9.55 Ratings8.18 Ratings8.366 Ratings
Security controls10.05 Ratings7.18 Ratings8.964 Ratings
Automation10.04 Ratings8.01 Ratings7.92 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Azure NetApp FilesGoogle Compute Engine
Small Businesses
DigitalOcean Droplets
DigitalOcean Droplets
Score 9.4 out of 10
DigitalOcean Droplets
DigitalOcean Droplets
Score 9.4 out of 10
DigitalOcean Droplets
DigitalOcean Droplets
Score 9.4 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.0 out of 10
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.0 out of 10
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.0 out of 10
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.0 out of 10
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Azure NetApp FilesGoogle Compute Engine
Likelihood to Recommend
7.5
(5 ratings)
8.0
(8 ratings)
8.8
(64 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
7.2
(3 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.6
(9 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
9.7
(27 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
9.1
(27 ratings)
Support Rating
8.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(10 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Amazon Elastic File System (EFS)Azure NetApp FilesGoogle Compute Engine
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
NetApp
In my opinion, I would say it is more suitable to huge workloads, where you really needs the reliability and performance that a Netapp storage provides to you, larger share sizes, etc. Use cases where you really needs to store large amounts of non-structured data. It is not a cheap solution, I mean, you can find other options to store your data on the Cloud at smaller prices. So, for small companies, or companies that depends mostly on web-applications, or don't have such a specific requirements, I would not go with Azure Netapp Files.
Read full review
Google
You can use Google Cloud Compute Engine as an option to configure your Gitlab, GitHub, and Azure DevOps self-hosted runners. This allows full control and management of your runners rather than using the default runners, which you cannot manage. Additionally, they can be used as a workspace, which you can provide to the employees, where they can test their workloads or use them as a local host and then deploy to the actual production-grade instance.
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
NetApp
  • We have found that it scales very well. In some cases we had a large existing storage infrastructure and were able to migrate it while other times we started from scratch with low storage demands and Azure NetApp Files fit the bill each time.
  • We have been impressed with the replication capabailities.
  • The read and write speed when interacting with files is a major asset.
Read full review
Google
  • Scaling - whether it's traffic spikes or just steady growth, Google Compute Engine's auto-scaling makes sure we've got the compute power we need without any manual juggling acts
  • Load balancing - Keeping things smooth with that load balancing across multiple VMs, so our users don't have to deal with slow load times or downtime even when things get crazy busy
  • Customizability - Mix and match configs for CPU, RAM, storage and whatnot to suit our specific app needs
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
NetApp
  • It does not support file locking although its available as an add-on
  • Design is far from native and has a learning curve
  • We would like to have backup functionality built in so that we don't run into the issue where the replication process makes a copy of the corrupted data.
Read full review
Google
  • Built-in monitoring via Stackdriver is quite expensive for what it provides.
  • Initially provided quotas (ie. max compute units one can use) are very low and it took several requests to get an appropriate amount.
  • Support on GCE is limited to their knowledge base and forums. For more hands-on support provided by Google, you must pay for their Premium services.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
NetApp
No answers on this topic
Google
Its pretty good, easy and good performance. Also, interface is very good for starters compared to competitors. Infra as Code (IaC) using Terraform even added easiness for creation, management and deletion of compute Virtual Machines (VM). Overall, very good and very easy cloud based compute platform which simplified infrastructure, very much recommend.
Read full review
Usability
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
NetApp
No answers on this topic
Google
Having interacted with several cloud services, GCE stands out to me as more usable than most. The naming and locating of features is a little more intuitive than most I've interacted with, and hinting is also quite helpful. Getting staff up to speed has proven to be overall less painful than others.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
NetApp
No answers on this topic
Google
Google Compute Engine works well for cloud project with lesser geographical audience. It sometimes gives error while everything is set up perfectly. We also keep on check any updates available because that's one reason of site getting down. Google Compute Engine is ultimately a top solution to build an app and publish it online within a few minutes
Read full review
Performance
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
NetApp
No answers on this topic
Google
It works great all the time except for occasional issues, but overall, I am very happy with the performance. It delivers on the promise it makes and as per the SLAs provided. Networking is great with a premium network, and AZs are also widespread across geographies. Overall, it is a great infra item to have, which you can scale as you want.
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
NetApp
No answers on this topic
Google
  • The documentation needs to be better for intermediate users - There are first steps that one can easily follow, but after that, the documentation is often spotty or not in a form where one can follow the steps and accomplish the task. Also, the documentation and the product often go out of sync, where the commands from the documentation do not work with the current version of the product.
  • Google support was great and their presence on site was very helpful in dealing with various issues.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Amazon AWS
EFS is easier to configure, no need for Active Directory.
Read full review
NetApp
Azure NetApp Files is very well integrated with Microsoft Azure, we use the same request methods that everyone knows from Azure. NetApp and Microsoft has built a very efficient solution that allows you to transfer virtually any service to the Microsoft public cloud. Azure NetApp Files also protects our data very well.
Read full review
Google
Google Compute Engine provides a one stop solution for all the complex features and the UI is better than Amazon's EC2 and Azure Machine Learning for ease of usability. It's always good to have an eco-system of products from Google as it's one of the most used search engine and IoT services provider, which helps with ease of integration and updates in the future.
Read full review
Scalability
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
NetApp
No answers on this topic
Google
It works really well with other Google Cloud services, making it easy to build scalable solutions across different teams and locations.
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
NetApp
  • The main hurdle in promoting this solution is the price. Its price definitely requires an improvement. It is more expensive than other options, so customers go for a cheaper option.
  • Its security and ease of use are most valuable.
  • It is stable and scalable.
Read full review
Google
  • With Google Compute we don't have the overhead of managing our own data centers reducing costs and reducing the staff needed to manage systems.
  • As I said earlier, Google's costs are ~1/2 of AWS, so we are able to see a ROI much faster.
Read full review
ScreenShots

Google Compute Engine Screenshots

Screenshot of How to choose the right VM
With thousands of applications, each with different requirements, which VM is right for you?Screenshot of documentation, guides, and reference architectures
Migration Center is Google Cloud's unified migration platform with features like cloud spend estimation, asset discovery, and a variety of tooling for different migration scenarios.