We performed a comparison between Google Compute Engine and Microsoft Azure based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup is reasonably straightforward. It's a handful of networks and a handful of computers."
"The main motive for choosing Google Compute Engine is pricing."
"The most valuable feature is auto-scaling."
"Everything is simple and useful. The initial setup is not challenging."
"It's the most engineer-friendly product compared to Amazon AWS or Azure."
"From a feature perspective, I find API integration, automation capabilities, and features like preemptive and Spot instances valuable. Migration tools have also been useful."
"Google is managing all hardware. You don't need to provision or pre-provision your computer engine."
"The solution is readily available, and software engineers can provision it. It is scalable and allows self-service."
"Microsoft Azure has thousands of services and products."
"There are several products within Azure."
"We can easily access and integrate data sources from other platforms."
"We use the cognitive service, virtual machines, and customer DB. Microsoft Azure is also scalable and easy to install."
"In terms of computer resource management and reduced cost, it is very, very effective. In large environments, it gives you a lot of flexibility to provide different services, like disaster recovery and business continuity with simple and great options because you don't have to spend a lot of time for maintenance, upgrades, and security."
"The best feature in Microsoft Azure is that I don't have to change computers. I don't have to upgrade or if something breaks or a hard drive crashes. The lack of a physical aspect is the major feature for me."
"It is easy to use. It is also stable."
"Azure's Data Lake services are decent. I like AKS, and API Management is relatively straightforward to use. The security and SIEM options Azure offers are good. All the infrastructure services are easy to use and set up."
"The licensing process is not a very straightforward process."
"It is not very user-friendly for non-experienced users"
"The biggest problem is that it's got a very archaean and complex security environment that has to be very carefully set up and is easy to break."
"It has some limitations. For example, you don't get through layer two connectivity. So I've had some difficulty deploying custom VMs. For example, you can't deploy a KVM file to file directly on GCP."
"I rate the product's stability around five to six out of ten."
"I would like to improve the solution’s UI while deploying a container. It is sometimes hard to figure out the container’s details and format that you want to deploy. The tool does not give you a guide to find out the error and why the container is not starting up which could be because you have configured it wrong. This is always a hit on the setup."
"There have been instances when a customer has tried to deploy a certain number of VMs inside a project, and they come across quota issues."
"Google Compute Engine needs to have multi-region support. It would also be nice to have a tracking mechanism."
"The solution should improve the shared cache. For the shared cache, Microsoft uses RADIUS third-party services. We have a lot of trouble with RADIUS and I suppose that is due to the fact that is not owned completely by Microsoft."
"There are times when using a service in Microsoft Azure can be confusing because you have four or five options that do similar operations. It would be helpful if there was a clear decision tree around those features. Microsoft does provide a lot of decision trees around a lot of their services, but it's not for everything."
"Ease of use could be improved."
"Due to the pandemic, I haven't been able to utilize their full resources. This has made it complicated to scale up. I hope this will be resolved after the pandemic."
"The initial setup can be improved."
"We have reported some bugs we encountered, and it would be good if those bugs were resolved more quickly."
"I don't understand why we spend so much time and money on Azure when Microsoft relies on third-party companies for support in the CSP model. I don't know how the support model works within Microsoft, but giving it to poor-performing third-party companies is not ideal."
"Azure ARM console can be a bit overwhelming at the beginning."
Google Compute Engine is ranked 11th in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 13 reviews while Microsoft Azure is ranked 1st in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 299 reviews. Google Compute Engine is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Azure is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Google Compute Engine writes "A cost-effective and quite an elastic solution ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure writes "Promotes clear, logical structures preventing impractical configurations and offers seamless integration ". Google Compute Engine is most compared with Google App Engine, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), IBM Public Cloud and Amazon AWS, whereas Microsoft Azure is most compared with Google Firebase, Amazon AWS, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Pivotal Cloud Foundry and Alibaba Cloud. See our Google Compute Engine vs. Microsoft Azure report.
See our list of best Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) vendors.
We monitor all Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.