Google Kubernetes Engine supplies containerized application management powered by Kubernetes which includes Google Cloud services including load balancing, automatic scaling and upgrade, and other Google Cloud services.
$0.04
vCPU-hr Autopilot Mode
Kubernetes
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Kubernetes is an open-source container cluster manager.
N/A
Vultr
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
Vultr is an independent cloud computing platform on a mission to provide businesses and developers around the world with unrivaled ease of use, price-to-performance, and global reach.
$2.50
per month
Pricing
Google Kubernetes Engine
Kubernetes
Vultr
Editions & Modules
Autopilot Mode - 3 year commitment price (USD)
$0
GKE Autopilot Ephemeral Storage Price GB-hr
Autopilot Mode - 1 year commitment price (USD)
$0.0000438
GKE Autopilot Ephemeral Storage Price GB-hr
Autopilot Mode - Regular Price
$0.0000548
GKE Autopilot Ephemeral Storage Price GB-hr
Autopilot Mode - Spot Price
$0.0000548
GKE Autopilot Ephemeral Storage Price GB-hr
Autopilot Mode - Spot Price
$0.0014767
GKE Autopilot Pod Memory Price GB-hr
Autopilot Mode - 3 year commitment price (USD)
$0
GKE Autopilot Pod Memory Price GB-hr
Autopilot Mode - 1 year commitment price (USD)
$0.0039380
GKE Autopilot Pod Memory Price GB-hr
Autopilot Mode - Regular Price
$0.0049225
GKE Autopilot Price GB-hr
Autopilot Mode - Spot Price
$0.0133
GKE Autopilot vCPU Price vCPU-hr
Autopilot Mode - 3 year commitment price (USD)
$0.02
GKE Autopilot vCPU Price vCPU-hr
Autopilot Mode - 1 year commitment price (USD)
$0.0356000
GKE Autopilot vCPU Price vCPU-hr
Autopilot Mode - Regular Price
$0.0445
vCPU Price vCPU-hr
Standard Mode
$0.10
per hour
Cluster Management
$0.10
per cluster per hour
Cluster Management
$74.40 monthly credit
per month per hour
Standard Mode - Free Version
Free
per hour
No answers on this topic
Block Storage
$1
per month
Cloud Compute
$2.50
per month
Object Storage
$5
per month
Kubernetes Engine
$10
per month
Load Balancers
$10
per month
Managed Databases
$15
per month
Optimized Cloud Compute
$28
per month
Cloud GPU
$90
per month
Bare Metal
$120
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Google Kubernetes Engine
Kubernetes
Vultr
Free Trial
Yes
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
Pricing is based on specifications chosen in each product category. Bandwidth is also included up to a certain amount per month.
Our organization went with Google's Kubernetes Engine because we are already significantly invested in the Google Cloud Platform. In our evaluation of Amazon's Elastic Kubernetes Service we were turned off by recent concerns about Amazon becoming overly dominant in the cloud …
GKE spins up new nodes a LOT faster than AKS. GKE's auto scaler runs a lot smoother than AKS. GKE has a lot more Kubernetes features baked in natively.
We had to move several products to Google Cloud, and the Google Kubernetes Engine was the option recommended to us, so we investigated it and ran with it. Back then (2019), we were not aware of Cloud Run-provisioned K8s clusters, so our other option was a completely …
In comparison to functionality with EKS and AKS, it has a better upgrade path and the price is lower. Not sure why flannel is the primary overlay network provider but network policies are supported as well.
If your application is complex, if it's planet-scale, or if you need autoscaling, then Kubernetes is best suited. If your application is straightforward, you can opt for App Engine or Cloud Run. In many cases, you can prefer to run the cloud on GKE. But once you deploy on Kubernetes, you get the flexibility to try different things. But if you don't seek flexibility, it's not an option for you.
K8s should be avoided - If your application works well without being converted into microservices-based architecture & fits correctly in a VM, needs less scaling, have a fixed traffic pattern then it is better to keep away from Kubernetes. Otherwise, the operational challenges & technical expertise will add a lot to the OPEX. Also, if you're the one who thinks that containers consume fewer resources as compared to VMs then this is not true. As soon as you convert your application to a microservice-based architecture, a lot of components will add up, shooting your resource consumption even higher than VMs so, please beware. Kubernetes is a good choice - When the application needs quick scaling, is already in microservice-based architecture, has no fixed traffic pattern, most of the employees already have desired skills.
I've been with Vultr over 5 years hosting multiple businesses and email related services. I never experienced a significant outage or data loss. Migration has always been successful as well. Support is top tier and IP reputation is clean. I like the choices of OS, ease of platform use and multiple hosting/ region options.
Engine upgrade rollout strategy - well documented and configurable
Integration with other Google Cloud services like the Compute Engine, SaaS databases, and some cloud networking like Cloud Armor
Graphical interface for a lot of operations - either for a quick peek/overview or actual work done by administrators and/or developers (via the Google Cloud Console, for example)
Local development, Kubernetes does tend to be a bit complicated and unnecessary in environments where all development is done locally.
The need for add-ons, Helm is almost required when running Kubernetes. This brings a whole new tool to manage and learn before a developer can really start to use Kubernetes effectively.
Finicy configmap schemes. Kubernetes configmaps often have environment breaking hangups. The fail safes surrounding configmaps are sadly lacking.
The Kubernetes is going to be highly likely renewed as the technologies that will be placed on top of it are long term as of planning. There shouldn't be any last minute changes in the adoption and I do not anticipate sudden change of the core underlying technology. It is just that the slow process of technology adoption that makes it hard to switch to something else.
Just a great product with no bells and whistles, which is the advantage. We spend very little time learning and using Vultr and more time using the systems we have in Vultr to complete our tasks. Not having to worry about the IT overhead is huge and saves a great deal of time
It is an eminently usable platform. However, its popularity is overshadowed by its complexity. To properly leverage the capabilities and possibilities of Kubernetes as a platform, you need to have excellent understanding of your use case, even better understanding of whether you even need Kubernetes, and if yes - be ready to invest in good engineering support for the platform itself
easy to use and configure. great bang for the buck. I need an affordable solution to host in the cloud data from systems installed at our client's site with the ability to drill down and change the configuration remotely. Vultr enabled us to do that in an efficient and affordable way.
Very good Kubernetes distribution with a reasonable total price. Integration with storage and load balancer for ingress and services speed up every process deployment.
Vultr makes it easy to contact technical support. The techs are very competent. In a number of occasions they have bounced the responsibility back to me when they could have saved us all time and heartache by simply implementing the solution directly
Vultr implementation seemed based on open-source tools and basic cloud principles - some things were more complicated to do compared with more developed cloud providers, but on the other hand it was more extensible by open-source tools.
GKE spins up new nodes a LOT faster than AKS. GKE's auto scaler runs a lot smoother than AKS. GKE has a lot more Kubernetes features baked in natively.
Most of the required features for any orchestration tool or framework, which is provided by Kubernetes. After understanding all modules and features of the K8S, it is the best fit for us as compared with others out there.
Linode is a more old-school offering. Linode pricing model and infrastructure rely on classic Virtual Machines. What we like about Vultr is that they offer the same at the front, but in the back, the machines are much more flexible and can be tailor-made to our needs, which of course also impacts the costs of running the infrastructure.
When issues came up, we reached out to some folks at GCP and they seemed to be very prompt and attentive to our needs. They were always willing to help and provide additional details or recommendations or links to resources. This kind of support is very helpful as it allows us to navigate GKE with more confidence.