Azure Container Apps vs. Google Cloud Functions

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Azure Container Apps
Score 6.0 out of 10
N/A
Azure Container Apps, part of the Azure suite of products from Microsoft, is a service used to deploy containerized apps without managing complex infrastructure. Users can write code using a preferred programming language or framework, and build microservices with full support for Distributed Application Runtime (Dapr). Scale dynamically based on HTTP traffic or events powered by Kubernetes Event-Driven Autoscaling (KEDA).N/A
Google Cloud Functions
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Google Cloud Functions enables users to run code in the cloud with no servers or containers to manage. Cloud Functions is a scalable, pay-as-you-go functions as a service (FaaS) product to help build and connect event driven services with simple, single purpose code.N/A
Pricing
Azure Container AppsGoogle Cloud Functions
Editions & Modules
vCPU (seconds)
active usage $0.000024 and idle usage $0.000003
per second 180,000 vCPU-seconds free grant per month
Memory (GiB-Seconds)
active usage $0.000003 and idle usage $0.000003
per second 360,000 GiB-seconds free grant per month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure Container AppsGoogle Cloud Functions
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Features
Azure Container AppsGoogle Cloud Functions
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
Azure Container Apps
5.4
2 Ratings
36% below category average
Google Cloud Functions
-
Ratings
Ease of building user interfaces5.72 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability7.72 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform management overhead6.62 Ratings00 Ratings
Workflow engine capability5.72 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform access control4.72 Ratings00 Ratings
Services-enabled integration4.72 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment creation4.32 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment replication4.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue monitoring and notification5.32 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue recovery4.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Upgrades and platform fixes6.32 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Azure Container AppsGoogle Cloud Functions
Small Businesses
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.3 out of 10
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
Enterprises
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Azure Container AppsGoogle Cloud Functions
Likelihood to Recommend
6.3
(2 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
2.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
7.0
(1 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Azure Container AppsGoogle Cloud Functions
Likelihood to Recommend
Microsoft
Azure Container Apps is a welcome addition for sure. Based on my experience, this has enabled us to move fully to the cloud and managed everywhere in one spot and on the go. We can scale it to our end as much as we would like. It can be assess anywhere and it is fully secure
Read full review
Google
Google Cloud Platform Cloud functions are an excellent way to start a serverless journey in GCP, however, using Cloud Run may be the better solution. For users not acquainted with Docker & Linux, I would definitely recommend Google Cloud Functions, however, for more experienced users, Cloud Run may be better suited.
Read full review
Pros
Microsoft
  • Gives user a level of autonomous access
  • No control plane or node pool to manage
  • Less kubernetes experience required
  • Easily integrate with Azure devops
Read full review
Google
No answers on this topic
Cons
Microsoft
  • Continue to enhance security
  • Better pricing
  • Flexibility
Read full review
Google
  • Needing a zip file is problematic (when wanting to automate deployment for example).
  • Requires another solution to execute automatically (ex. cloud scheduler).
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Microsoft
I would rather use AKS for my critical applications. The fact that the deployment process is dependent on as cli makes it hard for us to integrate with our standard CI/CD tools
Read full review
Google
No answers on this topic
Usability
Microsoft
Azure Container Apps are fantastic and it is a game changer. I would recommend it to anyone considering it. As you can scale it to what you would like and it is fully cloud native with better security. It is a no brainier not to consider it. I do believe that with further improve it will become even more attractive
Read full review
Google
Overall Google Cloud Functions is losing a lot of benefits to other GCP services, making it less attractive to users. A simple example would be the need to zip application files and push them to Google Storage which makes it a bit complicated to automate via a CI/CD pipeline. Another "similar" solution would be using Cloud Run although the need for a docker image is there, with the recent evolutions to Cloud Run (ability to downscale to 0) it makes a lot more interesting.
Read full review
Support Rating
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Google
Documentation is provided and clear for this service. Although GCP support is included in the current contract we didn't get to use it since the process is pretty straightforward.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Microsoft
Read full review
Google
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
Microsoft
  • As it is cloud native, we no longer required to have onsite prem
  • Reducing both from an energy and security perspective
  • It is worth the investment as we have saved about 10% of our ICT cost
Read full review
Google
  • Using it for FinOps, we cut the bill in 2 for certain services (out of production).
Read full review
ScreenShots