GCP vs AWS. What is better?

Building software or creating infrastructure on the cloud is not an advantage any more; it’s a fact of IT businesses’ lives. With clouds, organizations access computing powers for any scale at an instant via Virtual Machines. Not to mention a huge range of services like networking, analytics and data storage.  As a rule, IT business leaders decide between AWS (Amazon Web Services), Azure (Microsoft) and GCP (Google Cloud Platform). Frankly speaking, all of them are good enough with a couple of distinguishing features. Today we will discuss GCP and AWS as  the most desirable cloud providers for IT businesses. 

What’s GCP?

The Google Cloud Platform (GCP) is a complex of cloud services on virtual machines: internal networks, VPN connections, disk storage, machine language SaaS (Software as a Service) applications, and even TPU (Tensor Processing Units). When you run on GCP, Google monitors resources you use, and you pay for each of these resources per second, not minute, with discounts that apply when your services are used heavily by your customers on the cloud. Some of GPC beneficial characteristics: 

  • Apps deployment automation. Developers prefer to deploy their products on the google cloud or build the apps right there because Google is the originator of Kubernetes and it’s very comfortable to operate the cloud-based clusters 
  • Cost monitoring and supervision. Google is not a low-cost provider, however, with significant investments at first, you can later benefit from various cost-optimization scenarios.
  • First-time users’ support. Although working with GCP might seem quite hard for the newcomer to the platform, Google proposes some guides and step-by-step examples for the new members to shorten the learning curve. 

What is AWS?

Amazon Web Services (AWS) a well-known global largest online book store also made a statement to be the world’s largest public cloud provider that offers compute power, database storage, content delivery and other functionality to help businesses scale and thrive. Here is what you get when cooperating with AMS providers:

  • Cost-efficient AWS infrastructure design and implementation. When you plan the project infrastructure on AWS yourself, you can easily overlook some essential components and waste lots of time. Quite the contrary, delegating the task to AWS managed services providers means the AWS infrastructure will be designed and configured on time and will run smoothly. 
  • Existing AWS infrastructure optimization. Optimizing the existing AWS infrastructure can cost much effort, as you’d want to both use the technology to its fullest and yet not overpay and avoid vendor lock-in. AMS providers help you with that too.
  • AWS cloud migration and transition. AWS providers design and execute a smooth migration between clouds or transition to/from AWS for your infrastructure.


  • GCP is not trying to fight AWS as virtual machine instances leader, Google proposes alternatives: some custom instances, pricing models for particular customer needs so on. 
  • Amazon wasn’t in a hurry to propose a Kubernetes engine to their users as the most reliable deployment model. With that Google took an advantage and became an undeniable leader of Kubernetes.
  • Some recent reports from various sources notified that AWS has a big sprawl of services and for many of its customers are sort of swamped and don’t know how to start and optimize spendings. Google, if thinking smart, can use this situation to propose services to their customers that they really need, without extra waste.

Bottom line: GCP or AWS?

We already mentioned that GCP and AWS both are good enough. With them having their benefits and drawbacks, you should know that your cooperation with cloud providers won’t be successful without careful planning and cost-optimization automation. How can you do it professionally? Just turn to experienced DevOps companies that provide Google managed services and AWS managed services for their teams to design and implement a cost-efficient infrastructure on the cloud.