Amazon Elastic Transcoder vs. Google App Engine

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Amazon Elastic Transcoder
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
The Amazon Elastic Transcoder from AWS is a cloud-based media transcoding service available to AWS users which is priced on the volume of media transcoded by minute and the media's resolution. The service is scalable and anticipates transcoding of very large files or high volumes of files.
$0
per minute
Google App Engine
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
Google App Engine is Google Cloud's platform-as-a-service offering. It features pay-per-use pricing and support for a broad array of programming languages.
$0.05
Per Hour Per Instance
Pricing
Amazon Elastic TranscoderGoogle App Engine
Editions & Modules
Audio Only
$0.0045
per minute
Less than 720p
$0.015
per minute
720p and above
$0.03
per minute
Starting Price
$0.05
Per Hour Per Instance
Max Price
$0.30
Per Hour Per Instance
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon Elastic TranscoderGoogle App Engine
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsAmazon Elastic Transcoder offers a monthly free usage tier. The free tier consists of: 20 minutes of free audio-only output per month, 20 minutes of free SD output per month and 10 minutes of free HD output per month. Once you exceed the number of minutes in this free usage tier, you will be charged at the prevailing rates.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon Elastic TranscoderGoogle App Engine
Features
Amazon Elastic TranscoderGoogle App Engine
Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS)
Comparison of Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) features of Product A and Product B
Amazon Elastic Transcoder
9.2
3 Ratings
12% above category average
Google App Engine
-
Ratings
Service-level Agreement (SLA) uptime10.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Dynamic scaling10.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Elastic load balancing9.53 Ratings00 Ratings
Pre-configured templates9.03 Ratings00 Ratings
Monitoring tools9.53 Ratings00 Ratings
Pre-defined machine images8.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Operating system support9.03 Ratings00 Ratings
Security controls8.03 Ratings00 Ratings
Automation9.52 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
Amazon Elastic Transcoder
-
Ratings
Google App Engine
9.5
32 Ratings
20% above category average
Ease of building user interfaces00 Ratings9.018 Ratings
Scalability00 Ratings10.032 Ratings
Platform management overhead00 Ratings9.032 Ratings
Workflow engine capability00 Ratings8.024 Ratings
Platform access control00 Ratings10.031 Ratings
Services-enabled integration00 Ratings10.028 Ratings
Development environment creation00 Ratings10.029 Ratings
Development environment replication00 Ratings10.028 Ratings
Issue monitoring and notification00 Ratings9.028 Ratings
Issue recovery00 Ratings9.026 Ratings
Upgrades and platform fixes00 Ratings10.029 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Amazon Elastic TranscoderGoogle App Engine
Small Businesses
DigitalOcean Droplets
DigitalOcean Droplets
Score 9.4 out of 10
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.0 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
Enterprises
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.0 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Amazon Elastic TranscoderGoogle App Engine
Likelihood to Recommend
8.5
(3 ratings)
8.0
(35 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.3
(8 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
7.7
(7 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
8.0
(1 ratings)
8.4
(12 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Amazon Elastic TranscoderGoogle App Engine
Likelihood to Recommend
Amazon AWS
It is well suited in a large setting where people use different file formats and various apps to record and transfer their audio or video files across devices. In such scenarios, the transcoder would of real help to eliminate the hassle of converting the files into desired formats for viewing or doing some other analysis.
The transcoder would not be of much use if all the files have the same format and does not need any conversion from their source file formats. It would prove costly and not useful if it's just an additional step that is of no particular use
Read full review
Google
App Engine is such a good resource for our team both internally and externally. You have complete control over your app, how it runs, when it runs, and more while Google handles the back-end, scaling, orchestration, and so on. If you are serving a tool, system, or web page, it's perfect. If you are serving something back-end, like an automation or ETL workflow, you should be a little considerate or careful with how you are structuring that job. For instance, the Standard environment in Google App Engine will present you with a resource limit for your server calls. If your operations are known to take longer than, say, 10 minutes or so, you may be better off moving to the Flexible environment (which may be a little more expensive but certainly a little more powerful and a little less limited) or even moving that workflow to something like Google Compute Engine or another managed service.
Read full review
Pros
Amazon AWS
  • Works at scale, you can can transcode a high number of videos at the same time.
  • Supports a good number of formats.
  • Good integration with AWS S3 and other AWS Services.
Read full review
Google
  • Quick to develop, quick to deploy. You can be up and running on Google App Engine in no time.
  • Flexible. We use Java for some services and Node.js for others.
  • Great security features. We have been consistently impressed with the security and authentication features of Google App Engine.
Read full review
Cons
Amazon AWS
  • Amazon Elastic Transcoder requires a fair amount of setup.
Read full review
Google
  • There is a slight learning curve to getting used to code on Google App Engine.
  • Google Cloud Datastore is Google's NoSQL database in the cloud that your applications can use. NoSQL databases, by design, cannot give handle complex queries on the data. This means that sometimes you need to think carefully about your data structures - so that you can get the results you need in your code.
  • Setting up billing is a little annoying. It does not seem to save billing information to your account so you can re-use the same information across different Cloud projects. Each project requires you to re-enter all your billing information (if required)
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
Google
App Engine is a solid choice for deployments to Google Cloud Platform that do not want to move entirely to a Kubernetes-based container architecture using a different Google product. For rapid prototyping of new applications and fairly straightforward web application deployments, we'll continue to leverage the capabilities that App Engine affords us.
Read full review
Usability
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
Google
I had to revisit the UI after a year of just setting up and forgetting. The UI got some improvements but the amount of navigation we have to go through to setup a new app has increased but also got easier to setup. Gemini now is integrated and make getting answers faster
Read full review
Support Rating
Amazon AWS
Support for Amazon Elastic Transcoder is the same as any other service within AWS. If you are familiar with AWS, it is easy to start using Elastic Transcoder
Read full review
Google
Good amount of documentation available for Google App Engine and in general there is large developer community around Google App Engine and other products it interacts with. Lastly, Google support is great in general. No issues so far with them.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Amazon AWS
Amazon Elastic Transcoder is in a league of its own when compared to other alternatives in the market. The most noticeable competitor would be either Microsoft or Adobe or Google. When I had a chance to compare Azure products and Amazon products, the difference is obvious and the experience provided by both the products are very different in terms of user experience and interaction with the application. The cost and availability also were taken into consideration when choosing between the two shortlisted choices. So we went with Amazon's product as it is widely used and has support and maintenance which is basically better than the competition.
Read full review
Google
We were on another much smaller cloud provider and decided to make the switch for several reasons - stability, breadth of services, and security. In reviewing options, GCP provided the best mixtures of meeting our needs while also balancing the overall cost of the service as compared to the other major players in Azure and AWS.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Amazon AWS
  • Less time for integration with this service if you are already in AWS stack
  • No real time transcoding is a negative
Read full review
Google
  • Effective employee adoption through ease of use.
  • Effective integration to other java based frameworks.
  • Time to market is very quick. Build, test, deploy and use.
  • The GAE Whitelist for java is an important resource to know what works and what does not. So use it. It would also be nice for Google to expand on items that are allowed on GAE platform.
Read full review
ScreenShots