Azure App Service vs. Azure Functions

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Azure App Service
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
The Microsoft Azure App Service is a PaaS that enables users to build, deploy, and scale web apps and APIs, a fully managed service with built-in infrastructure maintenance, security patching, and scaling. Includes Azure Web Apps, Azure Mobile Apps, Azure API Apps, allowing developers to use popular frameworks including .NET, .NET Core, Java, Node.js, Python, PHP, and Ruby.
$9.49
per month
Azure Functions
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
Azure Functions enables users to execute event-driven serverless code functions with an end-to-end development experience.
$18
per month approximately
Pricing
Azure App ServiceAzure Functions
Editions & Modules
Shared Environment for dev/test
$9.49
per month
Basic Dedicated environment for dev/test
$54.75
per month
Standard Run production workloads
$73
per month
Premium Enhanced performance and scale
$146
per month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure App ServiceAzure Functions
Free Trial
YesYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsFree and Shared (preview) plans are ideal for testing applications in a managed Azure environment. Basic, Standard and Premium plans are for production workloads and run on dedicated Virtual Machine instances. Each instance can support multiple applications and domains.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure App ServiceAzure Functions
Considered Both Products
Azure App Service

No answer on this topic

Azure Functions
Chose Azure Functions
This is the most straightforward and easy-to-implement server less solution.
App Service is great, but it's designed for websites, and it cannot scale automatically as easily as Azure Functions. Container Apps is a robust and scalable choice, but they need much more planning, …
Features
Azure App ServiceAzure Functions
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
Azure App Service
8.0
4 Ratings
0% below category average
Azure Functions
-
Ratings
Ease of building user interfaces9.94 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability9.94 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform management overhead4.34 Ratings00 Ratings
Workflow engine capability5.23 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform access control9.94 Ratings00 Ratings
Services-enabled integration9.94 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment creation9.94 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment replication10.03 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue monitoring and notification8.04 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue recovery6.14 Ratings00 Ratings
Upgrades and platform fixes5.24 Ratings00 Ratings
Access Control and Security
Comparison of Access Control and Security features of Product A and Product B
Azure App Service
-
Ratings
Azure Functions
10.0
1 Ratings
12% above category average
Multiple Access Permission Levels (Create, Read, Delete)00 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Single Sign-On (SSO)00 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Reporting & Analytics
Comparison of Reporting & Analytics features of Product A and Product B
Azure App Service
-
Ratings
Azure Functions
7.0
1 Ratings
15% above category average
Dashboards00 Ratings7.01 Ratings
Standard reports00 Ratings9.01 Ratings
Custom reports00 Ratings5.01 Ratings
Function as a Service (FaaS)
Comparison of Function as a Service (FaaS) features of Product A and Product B
Azure App Service
-
Ratings
Azure Functions
8.8
1 Ratings
8% above category average
Programming Language Diversity00 Ratings9.01 Ratings
Runtime API Authoring00 Ratings8.01 Ratings
Function/Database Integration00 Ratings9.01 Ratings
DevOps Stack Integration00 Ratings9.01 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Azure App ServiceAzure Functions
Small Businesses
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.6 out of 10
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.6 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Azure App ServiceAzure Functions
Likelihood to Recommend
7.6
(8 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Azure App ServiceAzure Functions
Likelihood to Recommend
Microsoft
You may easily deploy your apps to Azure App Service if they were written in Visual Studio IDE (typically.NET applications). With a few clicks of the mouse, you may already deploy your application to a remote server using the Visual Studio IDE. As a result of the portal's bulk and complexity, I propose Heroku for less-experienced developers.
Read full review
Microsoft
They're great to embed logic and code in a medium-small, cloud-native application, but they can become quite limiting for complex, enterprise applications.
Read full review
Pros
Microsoft
  • It has options to deploy using CI/CD.
  • It has great integration with Azure Devops
  • It has all the common runtimes, so we don't need to install softwares.
Read full review
Microsoft
  • They natively integrate with many triggers from other Azure services, like Blob Storage or Event Grid, which is super handy when creating cloud-native applications on Azure (data wrangling pipelines, business process automation, data ingestion for IoT, ...)
  • They natively support many common languages and frameworks, which makes them easily approachable by teams with a diverse background
  • They are cheap solutions for low-usage or "seasonal" applications that exhibits a recurring usage/non-usage pattern (batch processing, montly reports, ...)
Read full review
Cons
Microsoft
  • the learning curve can be tough (just like other azure services)
  • the UX/UI could be more intuitive (just like other azure services as well)
  • monitoring can be hard to understand
  • Microsoft's learning resources are hard to understand
Read full review
Microsoft
  • My biggest complaint is that they promote a development model that tightly couples the infrastructure with the app logic. This can be fine in many scenarios, but it can take some time to build the right abstractions if you want to decouple you application from this deployment model. This is true at least using .NET functions.
  • In some points, they "leak" their abstraction and - from what I understood - they're actually based on the App Service/Web App "WebJob SDK" infrastructure. This makes sense, since they also share some legacy behavior from their ancestor.
  • For larger projects, their mixing of logic, code and infrastructure can become difficult to manage. In these situations, good App Services or brand new Container Apps could be a better fit.
Read full review
Support Rating
Microsoft
We had an issue where we deployed too large of a resource and didn't notice until the bill came through. They were very understanding and saw we weren't utilizing the resources so they issued a generous refund in about 4 hours. Very fast, friendly, and understanding support reps from my experience.
Read full review
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Microsoft
Azure has many data center, their services are more reliable. Azure has way more features than both Linode and DigitalOcean. If someone wants a complete reliable service, he/she must go to Azure instead of Linode and DigitalOcean because even though azure charges more, it is worth the money you pay there.
Read full review
Microsoft
This is the most straightforward and easy-to-implement server less solution. App Service is great, but it's designed for websites, and it cannot scale automatically as easily as Azure Functions. Container Apps is a robust and scalable choice, but they need much more planning, development and general work to implement. Container Instances are the same as Container Apps, but they are extremely more limited in termos of capacity. Kubernetes Service si the classic pod container on Azure, but it requires highly skilled professional, and there are not many scenario where it should be used, especially in smaller teams.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Microsoft
  • Reduced the deployment time of ASP .NET applications in the company.
  • Gave us an alternative to quickly deploy our applications without granting access to the version control system to a third platform.
Read full review
Microsoft
  • They allowed me to create solutions with low TCO for the customer, which loves the result and the low price, that helped me create solutions for more clients in less time.
  • You can save up to 100% of your compute bill, if you stay under a certain tenant conditions.
Read full review
ScreenShots