Google Cloud Run vs. IBM Cloud Functions
| Product | Rating | Most Used By | Product Summary | Starting Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Google Cloud Run | Score8.7 out of 10 | N/A | Google Cloud Run enables users to build and deploy scalable containerized apps written in any language (including Go, Python, Java, Node.js, .NET, and Ruby) on a fully managed platform. Cloud Run can be paired with other container ecosystem tools, including Google's Cloud Build, Cloud Code, Artifact Registry, and Docker. And it features out-of-the-box integration with Cloud Monitoring, Cloud Logging, Cloud Trace, and Error Reporting to ensure the health of an application. | N/A |
IBM Cloud Functions | Score6.5 out of 10 | N/A | IBM 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 |
| Google Cloud Run | IBM Cloud Functions | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Editions & Modules | No answers on this topic |
| ||||||||||||||
| Offerings |
| |||||||||||||||
| Entry-level Setup Fee | No setup fee | No setup fee | ||||||||||||||
| Additional Details | — | — | ||||||||||||||
| More Pricing Information | ||||||||||||||||
| Google Cloud Run | IBM Cloud Functions | |
|---|---|---|
| Considered Both Products | No answer on this topic | No answer on this topic |
| Key User Insights | ||
| Would buy again | ||
100% Would buy again 17 Answers | No answers on this topic | |
| Delivers good value for the price | ||
100% Delivers good value for the price 16 Answers | No answers on this topic | |
| Happy with the feature set | ||
100% Happy with the feature set 17 Answers | No answers on this topic | |
| Lived up to sales and marketing promises | ||
100% Lived up to sales and marketing promises 11 Answers | No answers on this topic | |
| Implementation went as expected | ||
100% Implementation went as expected 14 Answers | No answers on this topic | |
| Google Cloud Run | IBM Cloud Functions | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Container Management |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Google Cloud Run | IBM Cloud Functions | |
|---|---|---|
| Small Businesses | Mirantis Kubernetes Engine Score8 out of 10 | AWS Lambda Score8.3 out of 10 |
| Medium-sized Companies | Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) Score8.6 out of 10 | AWS Lambda Score8.3 out of 10 |
| Enterprises | SUSE Rancher Score9.4 out of 10 | AWS Lambda Score8.3 out of 10 |
| All Alternatives | View all alternatives | View all alternatives |
| Google Cloud Run | IBM Cloud Functions | |
|---|---|---|
| Likelihood to Recommend | 8.5 | 3.0 |
| Likelihood to Renew | 9.0 | - |
| Usability | 7.8 | - |
| Availability | 8.0 | - |
| Performance | 8.0 | - |
| Implementation Rating | 8.0 | - |
| Configurability | 8.0 | - |
| Contract Terms and Pricing Model | 8.0 | - |
| Product Scalability | 8.0 | - |
| Professional Services | 8.0 | - |
| Vendor post-sale | 8.0 | - |
| Vendor pre-sale | 9.0 | - |
| Google Cloud Run | IBM Cloud Functions | |
|---|---|---|
| Likelihood to Recommend |
|
|
| Pros |
|
|
| Cons |
|
|
| Likelihood to Renew |
| No answers on this topic |
| Usability |
| No answers on this topic |
| Reliability and Availability |
| No answers on this topic |
| Performance |
| No answers on this topic |
| Implementation Rating |
| No answers on this topic |
| Alternatives Considered |
|
|
| Contract Terms and Pricing Model |
| No answers on this topic |
| Scalability |
| No answers on this topic |
| Professional Services |
| No answers on this topic |
| Return on Investment |
|
|
| ScreenShots |



