Amazon AWS Pricing
SD
Sandeep Dhawan
Cloud Security Architect at Capgemini
We don't buy the clouds. We give them to the customers and our customers buy the tenants, the subscriptions. They are aware of the license documents with Amazon and the other cloud vendors. Once we have the subscription of a customer, we do the technical implementation.
We don't get into procurement or subscription renewals or product updates or anything like that. We are more on the technical side.
The price tends to be higher, but that is a usual case when prioritizing reliable backup solutions for servers and other infrastructure. In the cloud, costs are incurred based on usage, meaning that additional charges apply for each service utilized.
View full review »SP
Sudarshan Pavuluri
Oracle SOA & J2EE Consultant at Absa Group Ltd
It's a bit expensive but stable and easy to use. Licensing fees depend on the contract. It can be monthly or on-demand resources.
View full review »Buyer's Guide
Amazon AWS
April 2024
Learn what your peers think about Amazon AWS. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2024.
768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.
The solution's pricing depends on your traffic since they charge you based on the traffic, not the servers. The price can go into many, many thousands depending on the traffic.
The price also depends on your services since, if you are using Amazon Rekognition or S3 with a low tier price.
The pricing may vary and is often influenced by marketing strategies.
View full review »The solution is expensive, and I rate it an eight out of ten.
View full review »The solution should improve the pricing. The area that I work for is expensive. The product is cheap when we start using it. It provides AWS Free Tier. However, it is not the same when you work continuously with Amazon. We end up paying a lot at the end of every month.
The pricing depends on the traffic because they charge by the traffic. They do not charge us based on servers. The price also depends on the services we use. It would be different if we used S3.
View full review »HR
HariRajendiran
Senior site reliability engineer at Next think india
The tool is expensive.
KP
Khar Yeow Phang
Solution Architect at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Pricing definitely isn't high; I would rate the pricing a five out of ten, with ten being expensive.
AWS pricing is quite competitive. AWS is cost-effective because it saves time. Faster deployments and testing make it very valuable. Pricing isn't the main thing; it's more about getting things done efficiently. Then, engineers can discover additional savings within AWS itself.
So, it's more flexible. We save a lot of time thanks to AWS
View full review »AD
reviewer2335179
Manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
I would rate the pricing a nine out of ten, with ten being the most expensive. It's pricier than Linode, which has a fixed price and it is still a pay-as-you-go service. While for, AWS, over time, it gets expensive.
Linode is much cheaper and good for small businesses.
It's good for big players like Fortune 500 companies, but smaller companies struggle. My friend's company even left AWS due to costs. So, for smaller companies, it's expensive.
View full review »The tool’s pricing is reasonable.
View full review »YK
reviewer1280193
Assistant to Vice President at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
In comparison to Google Cloud Platform and Microsoft Azure, the database offered by Amazon AWS is relatively expensive. However, the database also offers rich features.
I rate the price of Amazon AWS a six out of ten.
View full review »AT
Ado TIMAMO
Cloud Architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Amazon AWS is on the cheaper side, as their pricing is more competitive. There are no additional costs besides the license. However, Azure sells Microsoft licenses, so they have an advantage.
View full review »CH
Christoph Helm
Managing Director at Erste Group
The pricing of AWS was attractive for us, so that's something that's okay at least for this transaction-based system. However, we still have some concerns about more data-driven applications or those that involve a lot of heavy uploading and downloading. So our whole data warehouse is still something that would not go into the cloud because of the pricing model. So if you stayed pretty much in the cloud, that's fine.
View full review »The pricing depends on the workload. For example, if your workload involves Windows technologies, AWS may not be the most cost-effective option. In that case, you might be better off with Azure.
But if you're working with open-source technologies, then AWS can be a good choice. They have their own process called RabbitMQ, which is an on-premises architecture where you can recompile all your applications to run on your own infrastructure. This can significantly reduce your costs compared to other hyperscalers like Google, Oracle, or Azure.
So, it would be worth my money to go with Amazon AWS at the end of the day. However, if it's a Windows-based workload, I wouldn't recommend AWS.
View full review »Much faster than other solutions at a super low cost.
One of the best-kept ways to reduce costs is to develop it on serverless technologies with AWS Lambda, SNS, DynamoDB, and S3. Business example: By deploying our websites on Amazon S3 instead of the traditional Apache web servers, we eliminated many of the compute costs. Our WordPress site is served by a static S3 bucket. One of the benefits of this is our sites are superfast, especially with CloudFront. CloudFront makes the S3 hosted sites available across the world in milliseconds, reducing network hops and costs similar to that of Akamai.
Just imagine the headaches associated with Apache web servers, MySQL databases, and Nginx reverse proxies?
View full review »For the initial 12 months, the solution is reasonably priced. On enterprise license contracts where you negotiate, have been reasonable too.
View full review »GD
reviewer1438260
Lead Architect - Expert Enterprise Data Solutions at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
We saw a lot of cost savings when we switched over to AWS. It can really save a company a lot of money.
View full review »It's not very pricey, but it could be cheaper. There are other options like GoDaddy and HostGator.
There are various options, and some can be cheaper than paying a full license.
View full review »It is quite expensive in my very personal opinion. Going on-prem in a data center is, for sure, not as expensive as going to AWS, but when it comes to a point where you are raising and growing, it simply makes a lot of sense to stay in AWS. It is awesome in that way. I am not aware of any extra costs.
AM
Ariful Mondal
Global Data Architecture and Data Science Director at FH
Licensing options are either a monthly pay for use option or a contract option.
They have a pay-as-you-go subscription. You pay only for the time you use the service. By service, I mean that they are not frequently used by clients. It's the best idea because they are very expensive to them because if it's a small company and you have the option of pay as you go as a solution, it would be less expensive, and better for the company in terms of saving money.
However, if some large clients, for example, use AWS as a hosting provider and compare their prices with other hosting providers, other hosting providers are more affordable.
I believe that a pay-as-you-go solution is very inexpensive, but not for monthly or fixed prices.
View full review »BT
Balaji T
Manager Project Management at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
When compared to GCP, Google, or Azure, the price could be lower.
As a company and a platinum sponsor, we know exactly where management will make a decision on getting the best price for us.
A monthly fee is a good option for a startup company or an individual, and it is paid yearly for larger organizations.
View full review »RN
reviewer1572765
Manager at a pharma/biotech company with 10,001+ employees
The solution can get rather pricey. It should be more reasonable. It's our main complaint about the product - the total cost of ownership is just too high.
We aren't buying licenses, we are buying cloud services.
View full review »RM
reviewer1559967
Director, Tools Engineering & Security, Data Platform
They have different pricing models for each suite of services. For example, if you are with EC2; E2 has spot instances and EC2 has on instances. You can pay upfront or you can reserve an instance.
You can pay upfront or you can on an annual basis for certain machines, and you can keep them up which you get quite a competitive discount.
You can take spot instances, as in certain predefined instances, that you can spin up when you need it, but those ten to be expensive because it's ad-hoc.
You can also just go with the normal EC2 instances that are charged at the usual pricing rate.
For us, it's use-case specific and we move between all three pricing options.
Price can always be cheaper.
View full review »WT
Wilfred Thomson
Senior Cloud Consultant at GBM
You are not paying a licensing fee, you pay for consumption. You pay for your consumption and it' is typically paid on a monthly basis.
It's a pay-as-you-go model.
Some services are expensive, but the basic infrastructure services are a platform that is reasonably priced.
View full review »NK
Reviewer01388
Service Delivery Manager at Orange
I think it should be less expensive. There are many variables involved in pricing, such as data transfer, and several other things.
You have to be very precise, and really detailed, and account for each and every thing. Only then can you do an estimation of how much the application hosting will cost you. You can't afford to be missing a single piece.
There are a lot of pieces that get embedded into costing for each service. So, it's complicated, and I really wish it should have been simpler.
View full review »I work on the technology side, I don't work on the financial side. Therefore, I really don't have any clue how much it costs.
View full review »SJ
reviewer936300
Director Of Sales Marketing at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees
From a cost perspective, Amazon AWS is excellent. You need to pay for a license to use AWS, and the license could be cheaper, but in each of the cases and instances I've used AWS, there has been a good chance to save money.
View full review »CO
Cyprian Oyiengo
Head of Implementation and Security at a financial services firm with 1-10 employees
AWS is pay as you go.
View full review »RJ
RameshJain
Founder CEO at PROZM Knowledge Services Pvt Ltd
We are just a customer. We just pay monthly for the subscription cost. I mean, hardly $50. We are a very small company.
I would advise others to work from an architecture overview.
Be aware of the very powerful schema-less data services in the cloud. They can help remove the need for data warehouses - e.g. multi-TB datasets - can be read, joined, queried and made to output daily reports within minutes, on temporary clusters, and that cost less than USD1000 per month. This is compared to the hundreds of thousands of USD for data warehouse licensing costs, plus the schema design time and ongoing DevOps they require.
Moving to serverless operations in the cloud frees up your people to deliver business services rather than spend days and days on administering data centers and the associated concerns that come with them.
View full review »RG
reviewer1450485
Senior Manager, Engineering at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Licensing can be purchased on a yearly basis, which is an auto-renewal. We also have an on-demand on-pay purchase.
If, for example, we have provisions for other things and we have a three-peak season then we add more core, more hardware for the on-premises machines. During those periods it is on-demand but the rest of the time it is licensed with a yearly subscription.
The pricing is reasonable.
View full review »NH
Nagaraj H
Senior Oracle Database Administrator at Refinitiv
The Oracle licensing is higher than it is with Amazon AWS.
View full review »AK
reviewer930837
Senior Manager (Engineering Department) at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Amazon AWS is offering different pricing, and saving plans, it's very easy for a customer to consider the Amazon AWS service.
Amazon AWS charges based on the user usage and some software license, such as the OS are included in their monthly charge. The transparency is quite sufficient, the customer knows what they're paying for.
The usage fees are an OPEX and they are offered monthly or annually.
View full review »BS
ByronSierra
Principal Consultant at High Sierra Consultants
It seems to be reasonable. It's the first one that I've used as a cloud platform, so they've set the benchmark for me, and now, I'm comparing everything else to them.
View full review »MB
reviewer1667751
Manager, Technology at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Licensing fees are only applicable if you're using Red Hat or an Oracle database. You have to pay for both of those. If you're using Postgres or MySQL, there are no costs for the actual database application. There are no fees for individuals using Oracle Java, but businesses pay a license. We use an OpenJDK that is vetted by Atlassian so if you don't want to buy Java you can use the OpenJDK.
View full review »GS
GauravSingh2
Product Owner for AWS and DevOps at Sunlight Financial
The pricing is one of the best in the segment.
They have actually reduced their prices, with the exception of the MLD which has increased.
It's by design itself.
They have placed the pricing well for a reduced market.
View full review »CS
reviewer1525914
Sr Solution Architect at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
The solution is on a pay-as-use pricing model. The price of the solution could always be better but it is priced competitively.
View full review »What is hard with the public cloud service like AWS, is ensuring you maintain a good budget. Plan the monthly consumption properly. If you don't have the expertise in the cloud, your monthly cost can go very high. It's also very easy to set up services in AWS.
I would also suggest companies look for a good partner that has the necessary experience to deploy the services when moving to the cloud. It's very simple, but you need to design a very good architecture for cost optimization and performance.
View full review »We need to pay for everything. If someone is a personal user, they get one year free. But if you are using this as a professional or enterprise solution, then your company has to pay. The license pricing is comparable to that of competitors'.
View full review »Amazon AWS has pay-as-you-go options available.
View full review »HT
HimanshuTejwani
System Administrator and DevOps Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
The solution is expensive compared to other providers because you need many of the services and it can add up fast.
View full review »BW
Bryan Wei
Director of Platform and Information Security at Brace Software
The calculating of costs is quite difficult. There are all kinds of variables to consider and it's all very unclear.
It's my understanding that our company is charged a few hundred dollars on a monthly basis.
View full review »Cloudflare and other services are developing more affordable solutions. They provide a much cheaper alternative to Amazon's S3 storage buckets. That's something that could be improved.
This should be comparable to the other options on the market.
Billing for cloud services can be difficult at times. In the VPS, you only have quota-based billing management, but in the cloud, it's as if every bit and byte and every I/O operation is metered, and your bills can be surprisingly high when you've published something that can attract a lot of traffic, which is one catch.
View full review »We are on an annual subscription for Amazon AWS.
View full review »SD
reviewer1044891
Integration Architect at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
The cost depends on the usage and applications. If you're hosting thousands of applications, you'll be paying tens of thousands of dollars. In addition to usage fees, you have to factor in the costs of development teams and the staff you need to support the applications. These are the three costs you need to kind of calculate to decide on the budget.
View full review »The costs could always be lowered.
How often we pay can vary, depending on the exact service. We pay, for example, both yearly and monthly.
View full review »IW
reviewer1453347
Cloud Architect at a legal firm with 10,001+ employees
The pricing can be very difficult to determine due to the fact that there is so much selection.
View full review »The pricing of Amazon AWS is high compared to any other cloud provider.
View full review »The pricing is good and it's set up as a pay-as-you-go. It's not overly expensive.
View full review »LF
Laurent Fichet
CTO at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
If I was going to compare the cost of Amazon AWS to Microsoft Azure, they are approximately the same.
View full review »IR
Ibrahim Rasras
Lead solution architect at a recreational facilities/services company with 10,001+ employees
A license is required. Some customers will provide their own license and others will purchase it directly from AWS.
View full review »PS
Pramod Sharma
Manager at a manufacturing company with 11-50 employees
It is most cost-effective to go for a long-term license option, that way you get a better deal for the cloud.
SM
Safalya Mitra
Vice President - Services at Locuz Enterprise Solutions Ltd
Its pricing can be simplified a little bit more. Even though they have been reducing it, I still believe they can do better as compared to GCP, Google Cloud.
View full review »This is a subscription-based product.
This is not an expensive product but it would be an improvement if the price were cheaper. Google Cloud, for example, is cheaper.
View full review »AM
AjuMathai
Senior Technical Architect at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Its price is kind of okay. When we do a migration from on-premises to the cloud, we typically use the lift-and-shift model. Based on the studies that we have done, cost savings are definitely there when we moved from on-premises to the cloud.
View full review »Pricing has been quite surprising, since we are running both DEV and UAT platforms simultaneously. It is definitely cheaper than the solution that has been managed by the third-party.
View full review »ET
reviewer1752084
Customer Success Manager - Architect: Cloud and Data Platform at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
The licensing costs is billed monthly.
View full review »You do need to pay for a license. We pay a monthly fee in order to use the product.
View full review »NK
Nouman Khan
Senior Solutions Specialist (Network & Security) at Ooredoo Qatar
KC
reviewer1115901
Technical Architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
When it comes to pricing, not all applications require that much performance. That's the reason why other cloud markets are also catching up, because the two predominantly high-performance platforms, AWS and GCP, are almost the same.
Looking at the primary market for AWS, I see that there's a lot of customers who have only mid-level performance requirements, because you will have all these normal applications such as online auction websites, gaming applications, voice applications, and so on. These are not, for example, large monitoring applications, financial independents, or brick and mortar companies. So AWS caters to about 40% of the market when it comes to general applications.
As it happens, in many cases, you simply don't need the high-performance offerings from AWS, nor the innovative products from Google Cloud Platform, which can come with large price tags.
DN
reviewer1483656
Assistant General Manager, Information Technology & Infrastructure at a real estate/law firm with 10,001+ employees
Licensing is on a yearly basis. I believe we are satisfied with the current pricing. Otherwise, we would have switched to another vendor.
View full review »ES
reviewer1443630
Chief Technology Officer at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
The product is an a la carte service. It offers a set of microservices that are associated with it. Therefore, the solution pricing varies quite a bit.
The pricing could be more competitive. If a company is questioning whether it's cheaper than owning a server yourself and running a server yourself, the general answer to the total cost of ownership is yes, it is cheaper. However, if you have to move data around a lot, it will not be cheaper.
View full review »The pricing is expensive.
View full review »VQ
Valeria Quintanilla
Manager of DevOps at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We pay about $20,000 per month, and the license is all-inclusive.
View full review »The pricing model of Amazon AWS is very good because there is an option to pay for what you use only, you do not have to give any money upfront to use it. However, we have some instances where we are on a monthly plan.
When you compare Amazon AWS to Microsoft Azure, the pricing of both is almost the same. There are some instances when one is cheaper than the other in one area but it is difficult to pinpoint which one is cheaper because it depends upon a lot of factors, such as the use case. However, the overall price of both solutions could be reduced.
View full review »FG
Frank Gerlach
President at Embedded Sense, Inc.
The cost is moderate. It's not overly expensive.
View full review »AS
Anoop Anoop SLK
Enterprise architect at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
The cost structure could be better. It needs to be more transparent. After COVID, it is competing directly with Azure - which is a bit more of a cost-effective option. It's also competing directly with Google. If they were cheaper, they would be much more competitive in the space.
From a licensing perspective, the cost of ownership is based on usage.
View full review »SS
reviewer1207650
Sr. Technology Specialist at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
The prices are somewhat on the higher side. It would help if they can bring it down, especially for the sporting segment and for on-demand instances.
View full review »SD
Steve Drill
VP Platform Engineering at Hydrogen
The solution is set up as a pay-as-you-go. It's very convenient.
The pricing could always be better, but it's pretty darn good. We're looking into some options for some pricing improvements through some Amazon partners.
There are not any additional costs to the standard licensing fees.
View full review »EN
Erik Najera Ruiz
AWS Certified Solutions Architect y Cloud Application Developer at Honne Services
When it comes to professional certification in AWS, I implore others to study hard before your exams because $300 is a painful waste of money if you fail.
With AWS products, there is a steep learning curve and I think there are so many aspects because it is really an ecosystem. If you are committed to reducing costs, or increasing performance, or optimizing in any manner, you have to know the solution really well.
I think the best way to achieve this is by experience, but if you don't have any experience, studying hard is the next best thing to do.
I don't handle the licensing side of things and therefore cannot comment on the price of the solution.
View full review »BL
reviewer1751898
Technical Account Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
It is comparable if you add in the price structure to an on-prem solution.
View full review »SG
reviewer1024230
Senior Researcher at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Technical support is expensive to use.
View full review »IS
reviewer1719711
Co-Founder at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
In terms of price, there are less expensive options.
We are using open source technology, so there is no licensing.
View full review »MM
reviewer1672716
Chef manager at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees
We have a monthly subscription for Amazon AWS.
View full review »AM
reviewer1392516
Manager, Enterprise Infrastructure at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We use their subscription model.
The solution could always be cheaper.
We have a monthly recurring cost based on usage.
View full review »HB
reviewer1465254
Software Engineer at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
When I first started using the solution I used a free trial, and then we upgraded to a pay-as-you-go subscription. We have an allocated budget of $50. I am happy with the pricing because the free trial project helped me progress. In our country, there are limitations for what payment methods we can use, we do not support PayPal, and credit card transactions are delayed. Hopefully, this gets better in the future. However, in other countries, this is not a widespread problem.
View full review »The Free Tiers program is great for testing solutions.
Their terms of licencing and reserved instances are very efficient (like Spot Instances for identified workloads).
View full review »GK
Gurudeva Kalledevarpurada B
IT Solution Architect at HCS
It is decently priced. The competition is also bringing its own cloud offerings, such as from Oracle.
View full review »AWS is scalable depending on your needs so pricing is dependant on what you use. Just be careful not to leave VMs running as you can find your next monthly bill a little higher than normal - AWS did cover that with billing alarms so it's not all bad news.
View full review »JM
reviewer1214376
Founder & Managing Director Digital Solutions at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Amazon AWS is a bit more expensive than Oracle.
View full review »JA
reviewer1131864
Associate Director at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
We pay monthly licensing fees.
Pricing is an area that can be improved because it is very complicated. It considers the number of processes, bandwidth, and different kinds of usage. This makes it difficult to predict. When we receive an invoice, there are always surprises. Now that we have used it for a long time, we have more information and are better able to estimate it.
JH
JorgeHerran
Senior Devops at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Licensing of this solution is paid on a yearly basis.
View full review »GG
GregGum
Chief Executive Officer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Have to watch price/billing creep, but there are tools to watch and monitor your usage and billing.
View full review »AS
reviewer1584264
Sr. System Architect at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
Its price should be lower. Currently, the price is the same if you are working in-house or in production. If you have to do internal testing or you are checking if things are working in-house, you need to pay for that, and the price is the same. The price for in-house usage should be different from production usage.
View full review »MP
reviewer1526127
Director of Technology at a energy/utilities company with 51-200 employees
The prices are a bit high. But they are the first ones on the market to really do this and they have a monopoly on it.
Depending on what you get, you will have to pay for a license. For example, if you get SQL Server, which is a Microsoft product, you need to pay for a license. If you get other products, you may have to get a license. They will provide that or they will sell it to you.
In some instances, it may be, that you bring your own licenses.
View full review »OM
Osama Mustafa
Cloud Expert | DevOps | Oracle Consultant at confidential
AWS pricing Reasonable & affordable by any business size, Small, Medium or large.
View full review »It can get quite pricey at times. Because of the patterns we're attempting to use, it becomes very expensive. Where we can save money by using Google components or Microsoft components, we can go much cheaper.
You must pay a licensing fee, which is based on the usage.
Essentially, it is determined by how we use the services. There are sometimes are a soft service, sometimes we pay yearly, and sometimes we pay as we use it.
View full review »SD
reviewer1217268
CTO & Product at a financial services firm with 11-50 employees
There is a license fee that you need to pay. There are flexible payment options. For example, you can pay monthly if you want to.
View full review »AO
reviewer922707
Senior Product Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
AWS is like all the other cloud providers. They're all like vacuum salesmen, where they come in, and they say, "Do you want to buy this hose or this vacuum?" And you're like, "Yeah, it's not that expensive. It's a hose." And then they say, "How about these extra bags?" And you're like, "Okay. I'll buy the bags. It's not that much." Then, at the end of the day, you've bought an entire vacuum store's worth of stuff. You don't know upfront what it will cost, but they have cost calculators and other things like that.
You'll probably experience some sticker shock with AWS. You attempt to understand the cost, but you don't realize what you're paying until you get your first bill. I don't know if Amazon does that on purpose, but costs can get out of control quickly if you don't have someone who specializes in AWS cost management.
I don't even know how many microservices they have now. It seems like hundreds, so what do you do. What would you tell them to do with Aurora compared to their other stuff? There's just so much there that it's tough to get a comprehensive understanding of what you're getting into with AWS. And that's just the nature of AWS. It's a giant ecosystem. Azure is the same. I'm not familiar with GCP, but I'm sure it's the same. They do their best to make it as clean as possible from a sales perspective, but the AWS sticker shock is real.
I'm not sure about the exact costs. When I used to do stuff with Commvault and stuff, I knew the ingress and egress fees and the data cost for storage on AWS, but that was a long time ago.
View full review »MS
reviewer930093
Director - Technology Operations at a educational organization with 10,001+ employees
There is no licensing cost.
View full review »NL
reviewer1650165
Audit Manager at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
It's an expensive product.
View full review »I cannot speak to the licensing questions, but the pricing per GB/month is reasonable and competitive.
View full review »As mentioned above, AWS does not really have initial setup costs. It's like a utility company; you use the service, and pay for your usage. The daily cost is dependent upon the service being deployed at that point in time. For the flexibility, and consistent cutting edge technology that AWS operates on, it's well worth the price.
View full review »NB
NikolayBachvarov
Software Architect at AIOPS group
You pay for a license, and that's how you get your own account. These are usually not individual licenses, but rather for a group of people. I think these licenses come at some volume, but I don't know many details about the licensing.
View full review »WC
WESLEI CARNEIRO
Architecture and Solutions Specialist at a marketing services firm with 10,001+ employees
AWS pricing is higher than other services.
View full review »VG
reviewer1724199
Systems Architect at a educational organization with 1,001-5,000 employees
I'm not sure about the licensing. I don't know what kind of subscription the university bought. I imagine it's similar to Cognizant, which had a usage-based mechanism. We bought yearly subscriptions for specific servers while pre-booking some of the server-based storage or computing infrastructure.
View full review »VK
reviewer1710180
Cloud Solution Manager
The price of the Virtual Desktop service from Amazon AWS could improve, it is more expensive than competitors. The pricing model we are using is pay-as-you-go. You only pay for what you use.
The technical support from Amazon is extra and there are more than 200 services you can use that has a cost.
View full review »While some clients will take a monthly subscription, we tend to do an SLA reseller with them for a one-year or three-year contract.
View full review »SZ
Sergio Zuastegui
Gerente regional de tecnologÃa at a manufacturing company with 501-1,000 employees
We can't complain about the pricing. So far, it doesn't seem to be too expensive.
View full review »FB
FABRICIO BRITO
Scrum Master | Project Manager | SW Developer at Mobi7
For our infrastructure, the cost is approximately $25 per device, and you have to include the other tools that we have in the cloud, for a total of approximately $200,000 per year. Our tools included several databases and Kubernetes. If the price was a little bit cheaper, I would consider this solution to be a ten out of ten.
View full review »If you want to move all production loads to AWS, the fastest way forward is lift and shift (which is what we did). However, this may prove to be more expensive than bare metal until the time the solution is updated to use the different AWS services. For example, when we shifted the load to AWS we paid a high cost as the mail stores were hosted on EBS. The storage cost drastically reduced after moving to S3.
View full review »Be careful with your consumption, especially when you are testing things. Costs can creep up on you relatively fast, without even noticing.
View full review »
Approximately $200/mo.
View full review »
VP
Vijay Gandlda
Director at HALL MARK GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES
The pricing is reasonable and comparable to similar services when run on-premise.
View full review »The solution could be more cost-effective.
View full review »ET
EmanTaky
Senior System Administrator at KnowledgeNet
The price of the solution is reasonable.
View full review »If you can plan capacity for one or three years, you can use the upfront payment option which allows you to save up to 50%.
View full review »BS
Bhaskar N Subramanian
Founder Director at hobbycue.com
The pricing is fair. We don't have any issues with the pricing.
View full review »The pricing and licensing are good. It's a bit better than, for example, Azure. They have a different model for charging clients.
Technical support costs extra. It could be cheaper.
View full review »GP
reviewer1738722
PKI Policies Manager at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees
The licensing cost varies with the project involved. Certain projects run around $6,000 per month, some less and others more. We handled many projects, each with its own complexities and specifications. The price ranges of the licenses varies with the complexity of the project.
MO
Milton Ortegón
CEO at Fit Ideas
The price could be lower. Currently, we spend between $300 to $1,000 dollars a month to use this solution. We try to avoid using a license if we can.
View full review »SY
Sergio Yazyi
Consultant at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
On demand, pay-as-you-go pricing is powerful to optimize expenses, but it’s important to keep a technical cost controlling function aware of usage and scale patterns to choose the best pricing mix.
Massive migration to cloud without analyzing the right service for the right usage can lead to higher cost than expected. It is important to get the right advice to match each use case needed to the optimum cloud economics.
Even if a lot of decisions to go to the cloud are based in the promise of lower costs, the true power of cloud services is their flexibility, rate of innovation, and avoiding vendor lock-in if architected consciously.
Even if a lift and shift approach with short schedules can lead to mistakes in choosing services and paying more than optimum, the speed in which you can correct the mistake is not comparable to any other infrastructure option.
This is forcing even the traditional hardware vendors to reinvent their business models and develop financial offerings that include operating expense based financing (pay-as-you-grow) or services based agreements (pay-as-you-go) to make their private cloud offerings competitive.
The other aspect to consider is the managed service required to get the most of this platform. Don’t underestimate the quality of the advice and support required. But at the same time, consider your core business management time released by adopting a platform instead of managing the components internally.
The internal expertise should evolve to understand how to use it best for the business outcomes pursued instead of the technicalities of how to make it. That’s where the right partnerships can be leveraged.
View full review »LW
reviewer1759671
Technical Solution Architect
SK
reviewer1716381
Architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
The licensing costs are all similar. All charges are similar in nature, such as storage cost, compute cost, VM cost, or VP costs, and all those things. Two advantages on this point here are whether you take Spot Instances or if you reserve for long term usage, then you'll get a lot of benefit.
If you want to use any third party services you have to pay from the Marketplace, but the other things are all pay-as-you-go kind of a model.
EG
Ersin Gulacti
Service Management Department Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
In terms of price, it is more expensive than other cloud providers, but it is worth it. It is not that much more, so you can go with it. It's not too bad. It's more expensive than the others, but it's bearable.
View full review »IA
IshtiaqAhmad
Senior Software Engineer at consol gulf
The solution can get to be expensive.
View full review »What attracted us was the on-demand pricing. It's a pay-per-use model.
It is costly, but when you use the pay-per-use model, it is cheaper.
The price could be cheaper, but it's better than what is available.
View full review »CF
reviewer1465647
Cloud Solutions Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Amazon AWS is really cost-effective. But the number of choices that you have to make can make the pricing very difficult. You have so many options, so it can be quite difficult to get into pricing.
View full review »DM
DanielMoreno
IT Architect at Orbis Data
There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fees.
View full review »SB
reviewer1406421
Senior Architect, Technology Transformation Group at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
The price of the solution can get expensive. They could work to lower it for their clients.
Those that use the licensing do need to pay a fee. It can be paid on a yearly or monthly basis.
View full review »GS
Gustavo Salmeron
DevOps Engineer at Apptegy
The pricing of Amazon is higher than that of SalesForce. We thought that things would be cheaper when it comes to Mexico and that a connection would be made between the facilities and SalesForce.
CF
reviewer932685
VP at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
This is a subscription-based service and there are licensing fees.
View full review »KB
Kaushik Bhaduri
Co-Founder at a consultancy with 1-10 employees
Considering the kind of services they provide and the space they play in, compared to other solutions like Microsoft and Google, I think they've done a pretty good job with their pricing. The pricing tiers; I like the way that they have dynamically structured the pricing mechanism; however, for small players, it's pretty expensive.
They're a successful company so I suppose many clients are willing to pay that kind of money for the services that they provide.
View full review »Unfortunately, the price is high. The pricing and licensing is explained well in the documentation.
View full review »The way AWS assigns prices is fully understandable and very transparent. Users are free to choose exactly what they need. They receive accordingly and there is no pain at devolution. It is all done by themselves.
View full review »It is not the cheapest one, but there is a good ratio between the quality of service and the pricing. Its price is good for me.
View full review »AY
ASHOK YADAV
Solutions Architect at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Amazon AWS could have more options and transparency in its pricing model. You need in-depth knowledge to adopt AWS. So someone without that knowledge base might not understand all of the costs associated with AWS.
View full review »DC
reviewer1406874
Consultant at a educational organization with 11-50 employees
With the enterprise product, you have to pay for a license, however, if you are using the open-source version, you don't pay to license it.
DC
reviewer1558359
Technical Lead at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
It is subscription-based, and we are happy with its pricing.
View full review »KM
Karima Mechergui
Devops engineer with 1-10 employees
RK
reviewer1474095
Software Engineer at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
It would be ideal if the solution cost the customer less. It's expensive right now.
View full review »AWS is appropriate for professional solutions. For other types of projects it's a bit expensive.
View full review »I find Amazon AWS very expensive compare to Microsoft Azure.
View full review »AP
AshokPolapragada
Director at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
It could be cheaper, and Amazon could also be more transparent with its pricing. I would first expect any product vendor to give me the utmost transparency on pricing information. There shouldn't be any hidden costs.
Their service offerings have a bit of segmentation, and they focus more on SMBs. They brought them onto the cloud and encouraged them to use solutions on the cloud. But strategically, they should probably improve that and offer some credits.
View full review »YC
reviewer1061583
CTO at a hospitality company with 501-1,000 employees
The pricing of the solution is quite good. It's very reasonable and very affordable.
That said, I don't deal with billing and licensing directly and therefore don't have the exact numbers in relation to how much we pay.
View full review »AP
Abdulla Pathan
Technology Competency and Solution Head at LearningMate
AWS is expensive and the cost should be reduced.
View full review »SB
reviewer1359597
Platform Technologies Lead Engineer at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
It is very expensive, you have to be very cautious.
Licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis.
View full review »SY
cto267069
CTO at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
While you may have to pay for some of the product kits, it's a monthly fee for everything.
View full review »VP
Venkateswarlu Paturu
Service Delivery Manager / Architect at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
A few of our customers pay for it yearly and monthly. Sometimes, when it's related to the data, the pricing seems to be high. It could be cheaper on a transactional basis.
View full review »VK
reviewer1305831
Assistant Manager at a comms service provider with 5,001-10,000 employees
The price of the solution is fair compared to competitors.
View full review »SK
reviewer1540659
Director at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
Its pricing model is too complex.
View full review »CS
reviewer1084716
Arquiteto de Soluções at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
It is much more expensive than any other cloud provider.
View full review »We pay for Amazon AWS annually.
View full review »HG
reviewer1595568
Technical Content Writer at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
We are currently paying for the solution on an annual basis.
View full review »AT
reviewer1536603
Regional Solutions Architect at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
The pricing is confusing. Sometimes there are hidden charges.
View full review »UD
reviewer1530834
Director at a media company with 11-50 employees
We are not happy with the general price and find most of Amazon's products to be quite expensive.
View full review »JP
reviewer1561038
Chief Technology Officer at a financial services firm with 11-50 employees
The price, in general, could be better.
View full review »EK
reviewer1601793
Sr Lead Data & Information Architect at a pharma/biotech company with 5,001-10,000 employees
The price is quite good; it is a pay-as-you-go option.
View full review »TG
reviewer1261494
Vice President at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
It's expensive. It costs you an arm and a leg. It's just about your expertise to do it on-prem versus in the cloud. I think it's more cost-effective to do it on-prem, but not everybody has a lab or the capital equipment budget to staff a lab. So, they are defaulting to using a service.
That's the trade-off. If you're going to scale, most of the time, people are going to build it in-house. To get development started and to get things moving quickly, the cloud providers offer a valuable service. The biggest charge is for storage, moving data back and forth, and the ingress and egress charges.
View full review »MJ
Muhammad-Junaid
Consultant at Skill Orbit
I find that Amazon AWS is expensive.
View full review »FM
Fran Maita
Analyst at 1980
Before choosing you can read other opinions and opt for the best tool that has aesthetic value and focus that is on par with Amazon AWS.
View full review »AC
reviewer1717506
Microsoft 365 Technical Solution Architect at a marketing services firm with self employed
I pay for a yearly license to use this product.
View full review »GH
reviewer931998
Assistant Professor at a university with 51-200 employees
The license for Amazon AWS is expensive. I am currently using the free version.
View full review »VC
reviewer1381863
CEO at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Pricing, I would rate a five out of ten. AWS is very expensive.
It's paid on a monthly basis and you have to pay for the resources that you use.
There is no licensing in AWS, you pay per usage.
View full review »FV
reviewer1530819
SAP Platform Security Consulting at a security firm with 1-10 employees
The price for AWS is good.
View full review »GJ
reviewer1471179
CTO at a construction company with 11-50 employees
The price can be better.
View full review »AS
reviewer915609
Director at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Pricing is reasonable, but as your usage goes up, AWS has a provision for businesses, and there's an option of locking it for three years.
I think that they also give discounts. Although, as your scale of operation goes up, I think the price probably becomes too high.
As a startup business, it's very well priced, but if a number of transactions go up, clients have voiced that they are in a situation and feel a type of pressure and desire to move out of AWS.
They feel this way only once the scale of operation goes beyond a critical mass or critical threshold. It becomes a completely managed service beyond a point, and then it no longer remains cost-effective. Our usage goes up as well as the monthly recurring costs.
So the price is something they should definitely look at. They should look at some kind of cost or price optimization, as the scale grows up large, the more the economies of scale keep in. They should try to become more competitive.
AM
Ayush Mehrotra
Network & Server Engineer at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
One of the best things in Amazon AWS is you are billed for the service you use.
View full review »BT
reviewer1597890
Chief Security Officer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
AWS is a cloud service, so it's pay-as-you-go. Some of the storage services could be cheaper.
View full review »SC
Satam Chanbang
Assistant Manager at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
The price is good and licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis.
View full review »OE
Ozgur Ekinci
Enterprise Solutions Executive (AWS Certified Solutions Architect) at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Due to currency fluctuations in Turkey, we find the product to be on the more expensive side. There are other, cheaper options on the market.
View full review »Read the fine print carefully and always engage experts to carry out migration.
LA
reviewer1463712
Utilities WAM consultant at a energy/utilities company with 201-500 employees
The costing model is very confusing.
The cost is on a monthly basis.
We are happy with the pricing.
View full review »EF
reviewer1028424
General Manager with 51-200 employees
The solution is on a subscription-based model, and it is pay-as-you-go. The price could be cheaper.
View full review »I think the pricing becomes a problem as the IT organization grows. They need to give better pricing when companies grow.
View full review »CB
reviewer1511115
Content Writer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
We are happy with the pricing.
View full review »AWS is much too expensive compared to current on-premises solution for this type of work. AWS IaaS is a very generic service, which is extremely overpriced.
View full review »AR
reviewer1559283
Technical and Solutions Executive at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
Pricing is good. It's average.
View full review »RF
reviewer1462632
IT Project Manager / Manager / Consultant at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
The price could be better.
View full review »AJ
reviewer1452045
Founder & Chief Operating Officer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Free tier is always there for demo and testing. Pricing is based on the usage.
View full review »Pay per use.
View full review »Buyer's Guide
Amazon AWS
April 2024
Learn what your peers think about Amazon AWS. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2024.
768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.