TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Google Cloud Functions vs. IBM Cloud Functions

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Google Cloud Functions

    Score8.7 out of 10
    N/AGoogle 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

    IBM Cloud Functions

    Score6.5 out of 10
    N/AIBM Cloud Functions is a PaaS platform based on Apache OpenWhisk. With it, developers write code (“actions”) that respond to external events. Actions are hosted, executed, and scaled on demand based on the number of events coming in. No servers or infrastructure to provision and manage.

    $0

    per second of execution

    Pricing
    Google Cloud FunctionsIBM Cloud Functions
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    Basic Cloud Functions Rate
    $0.00017
    per second of execution
    API Gateway Rate
    Free
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Google Cloud FunctionsIBM 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
    Google Cloud FunctionsIBM Cloud Functions
    Access Control and Security
    Comparison of Access Control and Security features of Google Cloud Functions and IBM Cloud Functions
    Feature
    Google Cloud Functions
    7.5
    2 Ratings
    12% below category average
    IBM Cloud Functions
    -
    Ratings
    Multiple Access Permission Levels (Create, Read, Delete)7.52 Ratings00 Ratings
    Single Sign-On (SSO)7.52 Ratings00 Ratings
    Reporting & Analytics
    Comparison of Reporting & Analytics features of Google Cloud Functions and IBM Cloud Functions
    Feature
    Google Cloud Functions
    7.5
    2 Ratings
    13% above category average
    IBM Cloud Functions
    -
    Ratings
    Dashboards7.52 Ratings00 Ratings
    Standard reports7.52 Ratings00 Ratings
    Custom reports7.52 Ratings00 Ratings
    Function as a Service (FaaS)
    Comparison of Function as a Service (FaaS) features of Google Cloud Functions and IBM Cloud Functions
    Feature
    Google Cloud Functions
    7.3
    2 Ratings
    13% below category average
    IBM Cloud Functions
    -
    Ratings
    Programming Language Diversity7.02 Ratings00 Ratings
    Runtime API Authoring6.52 Ratings00 Ratings
    Function/Database Integration8.52 Ratings00 Ratings
    DevOps Stack Integration7.52 Ratings00 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    Google Cloud FunctionsIBM Cloud Functions
    Small Businesses
    IBM Cloud Functions
    Score6.5 out of 10
    AWS Lambda
    Score8.3 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    AWS Lambda
    Score8.3 out of 10
    AWS Lambda
    Score8.3 out of 10
    Enterprises
    AWS Lambda
    Score8.3 out of 10
    AWS Lambda
    Score8.3 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Google Cloud FunctionsIBM Cloud Functions
    Likelihood to Recommend
    8.7
    (3 ratings)
    3.0
    (7 ratings)
    Usability
    7.0
    (3 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Support Rating
    10.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Google Cloud FunctionsIBM Cloud Functions
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Google
    Any sort of transaction or complex logic that is going to take longer than 250ms or accesses resources that are protected by permissions, secrets, etc. is a great use case for a GCF. Some sort of "helper function" associated strictly with the UI inside browser would not be a good application of a GCF. It would not be crazy to create/debug some fairly complicated logic inside the browser/IDE and when perfected package it up as a Google Cloud Function. I have done that many times.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    IBM Cloud Functions [is] not the worse product on the IBM cloud. I decided to write this review as I thought it would be balanced. I would still use functions to set up a serverless architecture where execution time is pretty quick and the code is relatively simple. I wouldn't use IBM Cloud Functions for async calls obviously, as costs could be higher. The functions documentation is lacking in terms of CI/CD, and there are unexplainable errors occurring - like the network connection that I mentioned. So I wouldn't just rely on IBM Cloud Functions too much for the entire system, but make sure it's diversified.
    Read full review
    Pros
    Google
    • integration with oAuth
    • integration with Firebase
    • integration with React Frontend
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    • Great substitute for a simple API calls to run non-complicated code.
    • Easy way to run Python/Java/Javascript to get something done.
    • File validation.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Google
    • Needing a zip file is problematic (when wanting to automate deployment for example).
    • Requires another solution to execute automatically (ex. cloud scheduler).
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    • Billing can be a hassle, not the most responsive customer service/support team
    • Handles & executes most functionalities, but other platforms offer more scalability if you're seeking consistent and stable growth
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    Google
    The console UI is pretty nasty. Managing various authentication/permissions configurations is just a nightmare. On the other hand, once you are over the hump it's not so bad. AWS Lambda is no better.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    No answers on this topic
    Support Rating
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    No answers on this topic
    Alternatives Considered
    Google
    It is easier to keep everything in house when we are using GCP or AWS. To mix Lambda with google cloud is not a best practice and will cause problems ahead. The segmentation is clear, if you are using google, you use Google Cloud Functions. if you are on Amazon, you use all AWS tools. You can't mix them. The price is set.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    • ICF is a lightweight service and does not require runtime configurations
    • Scalable on demand and hence there is no need to pay for runtime costs
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Google
    • For training purposes, it is free
    • Budgeting makes it cap the use
    • monitoring makes it predictable
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    • It directly affected our expenses since we do not need to deploy and maintain a set of separate applications.
    • It allowed us to pay for only the amount of time cloud functions run.
    • It saved on maintenance and monitoring of the applications it replaced.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots