No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Amazon Aurora vs Heavy.AI comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon Aurora
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Database Management Systems (DBMS) (6th)
Heavy.AI
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
24th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.1
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Relational Databases Tools category, the mindshare of Amazon Aurora is 3.2%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Heavy.AI is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Relational Databases Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Amazon Aurora3.2%
Heavy.AI0.7%
Other96.1%
Relational Databases Tools
 

Featured Reviews

SivashankarRajaram - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Cloud database has delivered high performance and cost savings for data recovery and growth
Amazon can make better access levels and reduce costs for Amazon Aurora. A cost reduction would support multiple teams to adopt this solution since the cost is currently higher. Comparatively, we have the feature of scaling and everything we need. If you launch PostgreSQL on-premises, you need to have a separate DBA for maintenance and everything. If Amazon reduces the cost of Amazon Aurora, it would support large team adoption. A great feature to see in the next version of Amazon Aurora would be improvements in vectorization. In our PostgreSQL, we have pg_vector that helps with vectorizing many of the tables and that is used for data science projects. If Amazon improves this vectorization, it would be much more useful for data science and AI projects.
reviewer2886843 - PeerSpot reviewer
Service Cloud Gb Strat High Technology Enterprise Account Executive at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Interactive analytics has revealed territory gaps and now needs simpler, more conversational guidance
I think whenever you're using these tools, you want it to be as conversational as possible, and I think more of that would be helpful for Heavy.AI. Allowing you to ask questions on how to do things inside of Heavy.AI and have it actually show you how to do it as you're doing it would be beneficial. That way you don't have to spend a lot of time trying things out through trial and error. Trial and error can be helpful because you're learning it that way, but at the same time, when you're just trying to do things quickly and you're not a professional or a user that uses it all the time, you might not have that. So you want to be able to get that information quickly and easily. Some aspects I didn't like, but some of it's just like, "of course not." I wish I could snap my fingers and have everything be perfect, but that's not realistic. The infrastructure is probably fairly expensive. I can't afford to do that. I would need my business, the company that I work for to do it for us. Otherwise I can't really do it. It's just expensive. I did feel that it was pretty easy to use, but I'm a little bit more experienced than the average person, so maybe someone less technical like my colleagues would struggle initially to figure it out. I think maybe enhancing the user-friendliness for people that are not coders, just kind of setting up the workflows and things so it's just easier would help. It seems to be more purpose-built for spatial stuff, for location plus time and things, but general purpose BI is kind of an important thing. I don't think people were actually taking advantage of that, and when they're not doing that, it creates a little bit of trouble.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"We had better control over the parameters that we could tweak in terms of intermediate storage and better indexing capabilities."
"Aurora is a key pillar for us, offering performance and availability."
"The most valuable feature is that the maintainability is offloaded to the service provider, so I don't have to maintain a database or do any administrative tasks, which comes in handy."
"Amazon Aurora is built on community databases and AWS has added additional features to it, allowing customers to have enterprise-level features at a lower cost."
"Another advantage is that with AWS handling administration, responsibilities like database provisioning and maintenance are significantly reduced."
"Cost-wise, switching to Amazon Aurora is beneficial, saving me around $60,000 per year."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon Aurora is SQL standardization, it doesn't have its own syntax which is good. It has a lot of hands-off self-management type of activities, such as log rolling and auto-scaling."
"Aurora is the best service within AWS products for our needs."
"Heavy.AI being able to do these things without having that background was powerful for me."
"We did see a saving of time and cost because we had a one-stop shop where we could access GPU utilization along with plotting of geographical data."
 

Cons

"It would have been helpful if they had provided some benchmarking numbers."
"I would like to see performance insights on the database based on the queries. Currently, we use SolarWinds as the monitoring tool. I would like to leverage SolarWinds’ performance insights in AWS services. SolarWinds gives larger insights when we run performance issues."
"While Amazon Aurora meets your current scaling and storage needs, there is room for improvement in cryptography and scalability compared to other databases."
"In Oracle, tools like Veridata allow for comparing databases and certifying data accuracy, even offering repair capabilities, which are missing in Aurora. There should be a similar comparison tool in Aurora."
"A challenge I noticed is during migration from PostgreSQL RDS to Amazon Aurora. There are technical challenges, such as the inability to provision the database using a PostgreSQL snapshot directly."
"I don't use Amazon Aurora's global database feature; I just use the local feature."
"Room for improvement might be in the UI, integrations, or data working capabilities for better user experience."
"Amazon Aurora should upgrade its base PostgreSQL versions more frequently and offer all PostgreSQL extensions."
"My experience with that was expensive to do for myself, so I had to get the company to sort of allow me to do it for Heavy.AI."
"Heavy.AI can be improved since it is a very large and comprehensive tool. For someone who does not have expertise in the tool, they will struggle somewhat, so I think it could be made easier for people."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool’s pricing depends on the instance type. For cost optimization purposes, we use the result instance category."
"There is no need to buy a license for the product. We can pay as per the use case."
"The price could be lower compared to its competitors."
"It is an expensive solution."
"It is quite expensive."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, with ten being expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Relational Databases Tools solutions are best for your needs.
909,153 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Healthcare Company
11%
University
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
35%
Insurance Company
19%
Healthcare Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise14
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon Aurora?
The pricing for Amazon Aurora is different from DocumentDB because DocumentDB is cheaper. However, when you manage the administration more closely, you can control costs better with Amazon Aurora. ...
What needs improvement with Amazon Aurora?
Amazon can make better access levels and reduce costs for Amazon Aurora. A cost reduction would support multiple teams to adopt this solution since the cost is currently higher. Comparatively, we h...
What is your primary use case for Amazon Aurora?
Amazon Aurora is a service provided by AWS, and we received support from AWS for our implementation. The direction we are moving toward is specifically Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL.
What needs improvement with Heavy.AI?
Heavy.AI can be improved since it is a very large and comprehensive tool. For someone who does not have expertise in the tool, they will struggle somewhat, so I think it could be made easier for pe...
What is your primary use case for Heavy.AI?
Heavy.AI is my main tool for large-scale data plotting and analysis. We have a lot of geographical data which we process for IoT vehicle fleets and cell tower pings. For this, we analyze and plot t...
What advice do you have for others considering Heavy.AI?
My advice to others looking into using Heavy.AI is to understand data and concepts in depth before using the tool rather than using it blindly. I give Heavy.AI a rating of 9.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
OmniSci
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Dow Jones, Arizona State University, Verizon, Capital One, United Nations, Nielsen, Autodesk, Fanduel
Pactriglo, TUTELA, Skyhook, npm, Inc., Simulmedia
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Oracle, SAP and others in Relational Databases Tools. Updated: August 2026.
909,153 professionals have used our research since 2012.