Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) vs. Azure Blob Storage

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
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
Azure Blob Storage
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft's Blob Storage system on Azure is designed to make unstructured data available to customers anywhere through REST-based object storage.
$0.01
per GB/per month
Pricing
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)Azure Blob Storage
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Block Blobs
$0.0081
per GB/per month
Azure Data Lake Storage
$0.0081
per GB/per month
Files
$0.058
per GB/per month
Managed Discs
$1.54
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon S3Azure Blob Storage
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)Azure Blob Storage
Considered Both Products
Amazon S3
Chose Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
I think [Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)] is cheaper than Azure Blob Storage (at least at the time I selected it). It is a low maintenance product and it is more reliable.
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)
We are an AWS shop, thus it is much easier to use with other AWS services. It may not always be the cheapest but once you are in AWS if you can decouple your apps and use this as one of your services it will certainly make developer's life easier and admin life easier.
Chose Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
We had already decided to use Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) for other compute services, so it made sense to use Amazon for blob storage as well. By using the same cloud vendor, we can more easily integrate between AWS services like Cloudfront. Blob storage is essentially a …
Chose Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Amazon S3 provides a variety of tools for uploading short and large objects to the cloud. AWS S3 is a key-value store, one of the major categories of NoSQL databases used for accumulating voluminous, mutating, unstructured, or semistructured data. S3 object retrieval is fast. …
Chose Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
They're both great. I really don't know the differences, but both have the same basic set of features, in my opinion. But, S3 is widely know as a greater tool, safer, and much easier. Also, it's used by and compatible with a lot of applications around the world. That made us …
Chose Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Most of our customers are on AWS so it's easy for us to integrate it with AWS S3 and we could deliver our projects on or before the expected time.
Azure Blob Storage
Chose Azure Blob Storage
Azure Blob Storage was used only because we were already using it for other projects, and it has a good reputation for being a reliable cloud provider. It also has widespread regional availability and allows for data replication. It can also be easily accessed via the API or by …
Chose Azure Blob Storage
Azure Blob Storage is the best choice to store files when the app runs in Azure. It also has some advantages over S3, like Shared Access Signatures, that make it easy to control access to files directly via a URL. Azure Blob Storage is very fast and we have not had any major …
Chose Azure Blob Storage
S3 seemed to be just as functional as blob storage in our analysis. The only real difference is we already were on the Microsoft platform with 365, and it was an easy system to continue to learn. That was the only real deciding factor between the two that made any difference …
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)Azure Blob Storage
Data Center Backup
Comparison of Data Center Backup features of Product A and Product B
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
9.5
4 Ratings
10% above category average
Azure Blob Storage
-
Ratings
Universal recovery9.73 Ratings00 Ratings
Instant recovery9.73 Ratings00 Ratings
Recovery verification10.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Business application protection10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Multiple backup destinations9.33 Ratings00 Ratings
Incremental backup identification10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Backup to the cloud9.54 Ratings00 Ratings
Deduplication and file compression8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Snapshots10.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Flexible deployment9.54 Ratings00 Ratings
Management dashboard8.04 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform support9.54 Ratings00 Ratings
Retention options10.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Encryption10.03 Ratings00 Ratings
Enterprise Backup
Comparison of Enterprise Backup features of Product A and Product B
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
9.0
4 Ratings
8% above category average
Azure Blob Storage
-
Ratings
Continuous data protection10.04 Ratings00 Ratings
Replication10.03 Ratings00 Ratings
Operational reporting and analytics8.54 Ratings00 Ratings
Malware protection8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Multi-location capabilities9.74 Ratings00 Ratings
Ransomware Recovery8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)Azure Blob Storage
Small Businesses
Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage
Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage
Score 9.7 out of 10
Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage
Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage
Score 9.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Bacula Enterprise
Bacula Enterprise
Score 9.8 out of 10
Google Cloud Storage
Google Cloud Storage
Score 8.8 out of 10
Enterprises
Bacula Enterprise
Bacula Enterprise
Score 9.8 out of 10
Google Cloud Storage
Google Cloud Storage
Score 8.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)Azure Blob Storage
Likelihood to Recommend
9.7
(70 ratings)
8.2
(8 ratings)
Usability
8.1
(10 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
9.8
(21 ratings)
9.0
(3 ratings)
User Testimonials
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)Azure Blob Storage
Likelihood to Recommend
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
Microsoft
Azure Blob Storage is well suited for cases where you are working with different data formats and looking for cost-effective storage solutions based on access frequency. Another area of strength is the encryption of data at rest, and encryption can be managed on your own. However, it may not be appropriate for transferring large data very fast.
Read full review
Pros
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
Microsoft
  • Ease of use both through Azure Portal as well as API.
  • Cost-effective solution for storing a large amount of data compared to other storage solutions.
  • Scalability, Security, and Performance are the other key aspects of Azure Blob Storage that are easily manageable through Admin Console.
Read full review
Cons
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
Microsoft
  • Unstructured data makes it harder to conceptualize what we have but with partners like Panzura that has been a non-issue for us.
  • Not always easy to understand the different models or tiers you can pick from when purchasing.
Read full review
Usability
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
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
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
Microsoft
Documentation sometimes appears to be out of date or not fully documented properly with new releases. It is like documentation comes out for a specific version and is quickly out of date. Another issue is documentation is scarce on new releases and only seems to get properly updated (and sometimes is still wrong) once enough people hit the forums to complain.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
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
Microsoft
Azure Blob Storage is the best choice to store files when the app runs in Azure. It also has some advantages over S3, like Shared Access Signatures, that make it easy to control access to files directly via a URL. Azure Blob Storage is very fast and we have not had any major issues with it after using it for several years.
Read full review
Return on Investment
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
Microsoft
  • Azure has increased the flexibility of where we place data within our organization.
  • It has proven to be very reliable and always accessible.
Read full review
ScreenShots