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

Amazon Aurora vs Heavy.AI comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Database Management Systems (DBMS) (5th)
Heavy.AI
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
27th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Relational Databases Tools category, the mindshare of Amazon Aurora is 2.9%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Heavy.AI is 0.8%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Relational Databases Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Amazon Aurora2.9%
Heavy.AI0.8%
Other96.3%
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

"The migration process to Amazon Aurora is the best part; it's one of its key strengths, as we hardly had any hiccups during migration, which was very smooth and pretty straightforward given our data was mostly in English."
"One of the standout features of Amazon Aurora is that we do not need to maintain disaster recovery or manage availability zones."
"Aurora's compatibility with MySQL or PostgreSQL benefited our database management. The migration from on-premise MySQL to Aurora was similar, so we didn't need to change our source code."
"Cost-wise, switching to Amazon Aurora is beneficial, saving me around $60,000 per year."
"The provision of custom read and write endpoints eliminates the need for managing a separate proxy load balancer."
"Aurora's features that I find the most beneficial include its database backup strategy, performance options, and input-output operations."
"My overall experience with Amazon Aurora is very positive. I rate it ten out of ten for its reliability and efficiency."
"One of the most valuable features is storage scaling."
"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."
"Heavy.AI has helped reduce handling times and improved agent performance significantly."
 

Cons

"The pricing could improve. It should be reduced."
"I don't use Amazon Aurora's global database feature; I just use the local feature."
"A challenge with stability is the lack of long-term log retention."
"When using the serverless version of Amazon Aurora, I encountered issues such as the inbuilt query editor not being available."
"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."
"I would like to see more AI-related features in future releases."
"It would have been helpful if they had provided some benchmarking numbers."
"Heavy.AI can be improved in agility to connect with multiple verticals, which is the first area, and the second is to analyze the business processes to prepare solutions for many verticals, as we approach this on a vertical basis."
"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."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, with ten being expensive."
"It is quite expensive."
"There is no need to buy a license for the product. We can pay as per the use case."
"The tool’s pricing depends on the instance type. For cost optimization purposes, we use the result instance category."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The price could be lower compared to its competitors."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Relational Databases Tools solutions are best for your needs.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
University
11%
Healthcare Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Construction Company
27%
Insurance Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Healthcare Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
 

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?
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 th...
What is your primary use case for Heavy.AI?
I was trying to get an idea of where some of the gaps were in my business specifically, where I should target my efforts using Heavy.AI for interactive analytics or graphics. I was trying to levera...
What advice do you have for others considering Heavy.AI?
I can compare Heavy.AI to some other things, and I was getting things that felt real. I was getting very good accuracy with it. It's hard to know exactly what is and what isn't accurate, bu...
 

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 Amazon Aurora vs. Heavy.AI and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.