Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon DynamoDB vs Amazon Neptune comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 2025

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 DynamoDB
Ranking in Managed NoSQL Databases
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Amazon Neptune
Ranking in Managed NoSQL Databases
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Managed NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Amazon DynamoDB is 17.1%, down from 24.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Amazon Neptune is 11.0%, down from 14.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed NoSQL Databases
 

Featured Reviews

Prabin Silwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers exceptional performance to users
Previously, when in my company, we used to store 64 KB of data, we used to get problems and errors, and due to such reason, at such a point in time, we had to find a different storage system or modify the system so that the size of the value is not more than 64 KB. The main aforementioned issue in the tool can be considered for improvement for Amazon DynamoDB. In our company, we have some data which can be stored as we want. Previously, only 64 KB could be used, and later, I think, it was about 400 KB. If the tool could have an additional 10 MB to offer, then the tool could be easier to use. The tool is a key value storage, where the key will be long. In terms of value, we couldn't store more than 64 kb previously in the tool, but later on, it was increased to 400 KB, which is a limitation that I don't like in the tool.
Sachin Mhetre - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient real-time fraud detection with integrated debugging support
So, I'm not using it currently, but when I was working with my last organization, which was a gaming company, we used Amazon Neptune for real-time fraud detection. We maintained user data, mobile device data, and other information as graph data. These vertices and the connections between them…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"AWS technical support is very friendly."
"Speed is the most valuable feature. The speed to store and retrieve data from it."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten. I've never faced any problems."
"The best feature is NoSQL."
"DynamoDB is a key-value database, and it's valuable if you have simple scan queries and don't need to do point searches."
"Amazon DynamoDB is a NoSQL database that stores unstructured data and provides high performance."
"It is a NoSQL product."
"DynamoDB is easy to configure, easy to use, and allows for writing data in JSON format."
"The initial setup is actually simple."
"Relational databases are never good at identifying patterns in graphs or other similar relationships, whereas Amazon Neptune is."
 

Cons

"The solution could be cheaper."
"The process of making a query could be optimized."
"Sometimes when we query through the UI, it takes a long time to get the results."
"Support is better if using a paid version."
"The design patterns and the documentation for this solution could be improved. In a future release, we would like to see an improvement of the data push options as we sometimes experience blockers when moving data."
"If you have no prior experience with this type of non-relational database, the syntaxes, implementation, or understanding may be difficult."
"Currently, there is no option for a scheduled refresh in this solution. We want the data to be populated into DynamoDB on a timely basis. Currently, you have to go to the DynamoDB table and hit the refresh button to populate it with the new data. If you have connected DynamoDB to a BI application for creating visualizations with charts, graphs, or other things, you would want it to get updated as per the schedule so that you have updated visualizations in your BI application."
"The solution has size limitations. It also needs to be more user-friendly."
"Amazon Neptune could improve by spreading more awareness for others to have an understanding of the solution because the technology is fairly new. The developer community and larger community do not understand it yet."
"In my scenario, the integration wasn't easy because ................in Java."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is costly. To reduce the costs, users need to read the node in front of it. For read-heavy groups, cache optimization can help manage costs.I can't disclose specific pricing, but it's competitive compared to others in the market, and this information is easily accessible online"
"For our use case usage, DynamoDB's pricing was okay. However, for high-traffic applications, the pricing structure becomes less attractive."
"Amazon DynamoDB is not an expensive solution."
"Given the services and benefits provided by AWS, the solution's pricing is average."
"We previously paid around $20,000 a month for MongoDB, and now we're paying just $4,000 monthly for Amazon DynamoDB."
"Its subscription cost is lower than similar databases offered by other vendors."
"You can get committed capacity or transaction-based pricing. If you're doing it on demand, they charge based on whether you're reading or writing. They charge $1.25 for every million rights to the database and 25 cents for every million reads from the database. The first 25 gigabytes of storage are free, and they charge 25 cents a gigabyte a month. So, it's a very different world. It's a quarter a gigabyte a month. You can store a lot of data. They have a separate fee for automated backup, and if you want it globally distributed, where it's distributed around the world, there's a slightly different price."
"Amazon DynamoDB is a cheap solution."
"Microsoft Azure and Amazon AWS are on par for pricing and Google has been raising its prices."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
4%
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
17%
University
6%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon DynamoDB?
The user interface could be improved to make it more intuitive. From a design and solution perspective, it's really good, but the interface always has room for enhancement.
What is your primary use case for Amazon DynamoDB?
We use Amazon DynamoDB for data lookups with the consultancy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon Neptune?
When taken as part of the whole AWS contract, it was cheaper, but as a single service, Neptune was more expensive compared to Neo4j.
What needs improvement with Amazon Neptune?
Some improvements could be made by introducing a UI that would clearly show the vertices and connections, which would make it easier to visualize and debug. Additionally, the need for downtime duri...
What is your primary use case for Amazon Neptune?
So, I'm not using it currently, but when I was working with my last organization, which was a gaming company, we used Amazon Neptune for real-time fraud detection. We maintained user data, mobile d...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Samsung, Snapchat, Capital One, Expedia, Tinder, Airbnb, Comcast, Lyft, Redfin, Netflix, Adobe
Intuit, Pearson, Samsung, Ignition One, Lifeomic, Blackfynn, Paysense
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon DynamoDB vs. Amazon Neptune and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.