Cloud infrastructure comparison
Neon Cloud vs Azure
Compare Neon Cloud with Microsoft Azure for enterprise infrastructure. Separate portable workloads from Microsoft-specific dependencies before choosing a migration path.
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 Azure 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 Azure Virtual Machines, managed disks, Blob Storage, virtual networks, and dependencies on Azure SQL, App Service, Functions, or Microsoft Entra ID. Confirm which integrations must stay in place.
Portability and integration
For Azure-hosted Windows or Linux applications, check OS support, licensing, authentication, and deployment scripts. For AKS workloads, review storage classes, ingress, secrets, and Azure-specific identity integrations.
Total cost of ownership
Use your actual Azure 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 Azure makes sense
Keeping a workload on Azure may be the better choice when it depends on Microsoft-managed application services, identity integrations, or existing licence agreements. A phased approach can move portable workloads while retaining those dependencies.
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.