Cloud infrastructure comparison
Neon Cloud vs AWS
Compare Neon Cloud with Amazon Web Services for your next infrastructure decision. Start with workload requirements, not a headline savings figure.
Where Neon Cloud fits
Evaluate Neon Cloud for VM-based applications and container workloads using the infrastructure services below. These are starting points for a technical assessment, not a claim of feature parity with every AWS service.
Compute
General-purpose, compute-optimized, and memory-optimized virtual machines. Match CPU, RAM, OS, and disk requirements rather than instance names.
Explore computeStorage
Block and object storage, snapshots, and backups. Validate application compatibility, I/O needs, retention, and restore procedures.
Explore storageNetworking
VPCs, subnets, security groups, and load balancing. Rebuild and test routing, access rules, DNS, and application connectivity.
Explore networkingKubernetes
Managed Kubernetes for container workloads. Review cluster requirements and provider-specific integrations; do not assume a drop-in replacement.
Explore kubernetesPractical decision factors
Service dependencies
Inventory EC2 instances, EBS volumes, S3 usage, VPC rules, and any dependencies on RDS, Lambda, IAM, or other AWS services. A VM move does not automatically replace those integrations.
Portability and integration
For EC2-hosted applications, validate OS images, disk layouts, startup scripts, and monitoring. For EKS workloads, review manifests, persistent volumes, ingress, and AWS-specific identity integrations before a pilot.
Total cost of ownership
Use your actual AWS invoice and usage history, including commitments and licence terms. Compare equivalent CPU, RAM, storage, backup, traffic, support, tax, and migration effort. Neon Cloud's calculator estimates Neon Cloud costs, not a guaranteed competitor saving.
Location, security, and recovery
Document required data locations, access controls, audit evidence, recovery time, and recovery point objectives. Ask each provider to confirm the location and handling of application data, backups, logs, and support access for your proposed configuration.
Operations and support
Agree who owns patching, monitoring, incident response, and restore testing. Review the SLA and support scope for the services you actually intend to use, not just a platform-wide headline.
When staying on AWS makes sense
Keeping a workload on AWS may be the better choice when it relies heavily on AWS-specific managed services, regional coverage, or existing operational tooling. Consider moving a self-contained application first rather than replacing the whole estate.
Check trust and security information, the SLA, and managed services scope as part of due diligence.
A migration plan you can validate
- Inventory and baseline. Capture utilisation, peak demand, service dependencies, traffic, licence constraints, and current costs.
- Pilot one representative workload. Test performance, identity, connectivity, backups, and restore procedures with agreed acceptance criteria.
- Rehearse cutover and rollback. Plan data synchronisation, DNS changes, an acceptable maintenance window, and a tested path back. Zero downtime is a design goal, not a migration guarantee.
- Confirm scope before committing. Request a configuration-specific quote and document responsibilities, support, data handling, and recovery requirements.
Supporting articles and guides
Use these articles for context. Confirm current service availability and commercial terms for your own deployment.
Make the decision with your workload data
Start with the migration assessment, size a configuration, then speak with the team about compatibility and a firm quote. No assumed competitor prices or automatic savings.