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

Amazon EKS vs Azure Red Hat OpenShift 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 EKS
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
96
Ranking in other categories
Container Management (2nd), Container Security (10th)
Azure Red Hat OpenShift
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
PaaS Clouds (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Amazon EKS and Azure Red Hat OpenShift aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Amazon EKS is designed for Container Management and holds a mindshare of 11.8%, down 12.2% compared to last year.
Azure Red Hat OpenShift, on the other hand, focuses on PaaS Clouds, holds 1.3% mindshare, up 0.6% since last year.
Container Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Amazon EKS11.8%
Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform14.9%
Kubernetes8.8%
Other64.5%
Container Management
PaaS Clouds Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Azure Red Hat OpenShift1.3%
Amazon AWS13.5%
Microsoft Azure12.4%
Other72.8%
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

Mahesh Dash - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Consultant at US Contract | Freelancer
Has enabled seamless infrastructure configuration while improving identity integration and monitoring capabilities
It has been since 2019 that I started using Amazon EKS. At that time, it was completely new, and many people were not using it just yet; it started from version 1.21, and right now we are on 1.33. Recently, 1.34 has been launched, but it's not yet available in the service catalog; we can see only 1.33. A lot of improvements have been made. We had numerous add-ons to install manually because Kubernetes is a completely different service than AWS cloud provider, and everyone has opted to use it. After opting, there is an identity that you have to maintain—one at Kubernetes level and one at the AWS provider level. You have to maintain one identity at IAM level and one within the cluster, Amazon EKS. A few things do not make sense within the add-ons, many of the secret providers that read the secret from Secrets Manager and then mount it as a volume. We use a service called EBS CSI driver, which reads the secrets or sensitive data from Secrets Manager and then mounts it as a volume to the pod at runtime. However, that doesn't have a dynamic feature where, if any changes happen in the secrets, it can read and populate in the environment. Sometimes consider your RDS password or OpenSearch password rotates. Amazon EKS doesn't have that feature to read the dynamic one and consider that the password has changed overnight; there is no functionality from the provider to see the changes and then restart the pod or fetch the new value. This often leads to downtime of 12 or even 6 hours, depending on when you realize it, so that needs improvement. Nonetheless, mostly on the add-on side, they have developed a lot; earlier we were installing them manually, but now with EKS auto mode, many things VPC CLI and pod identity service—around four plugins—are installed by default, which is a good thing. However, I believe there should be some solution that is self-contained, covering generic use cases. With the 1.33 release, they have addressed most of my earlier concerns, but I am still looking for some improvements, particularly in CloudWatch monitoring. In IT, we manage two aspects: either the system or the application. Currently, the application logs and monitoring are not very robust in CloudWatch; you can only find things if you are familiar with them. Fortunately, we are familiar, as most of the monitoring involves two types of databases: one is a time series for monitoring data, and the other is an indexing solution for a streaming service. This means we need to get the logs from each node, index them, and populate them on a screen. That part remains a separate service, but if they managed it within Amazon EKS service, where the monitoring is consolidated in one place, you wouldn't need to rely on Prometheus, Grafana, or different services. It would be advantageous to have a consolidated platform for EKS, as Kubernetes is leveraged; monitoring and logging should also be integrated simply by enabling parameters or tags. This would create a self-contained platform where people can onboard and start using it. Currently, I still need to enable logging and monitoring among other things myself; that shouldn't be the case after six or seven years in the market. On a scale from 1 to 10, I would rate Amazon EKS tech support an eight. Some individuals have a deep understanding of the services and can identify potential bottlenecks, especially with load balancer endpoints and certificate management. The shift from NGINX to AWS load balancers has diminished many previous issues. However, not every support engineer meets the same level of expertise, hence why I rate it a solid eight, which I consider decent.
DeepakMishra - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO, Head of Sales and Business Development at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Integrated cloud platform has streamlined app delivery and supported certified marketplace products
A potential area for improvement for Azure Red Hat OpenShift is to see managed identity support and ensure that some of the security features are not conflicting with Azure or Azure product features. I am sure in the future it will be more templatized so that we need not depend on Azure security features. Azure Red Hat OpenShift should be independent of Azure security features with respect to container scan and all that. Why would it use an Azure security feature? That is what I find. It is still yet to be GA and commonly available, but that is a strong reason for improvement.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"When we switched to Amazon EKS, we haven't faced any downtime in two years so far, which means no stop business growth for our type, and we can continue focusing on our business agility."
"Amazon EKS allowed me to build scalable, compliant, and enterprise-ready AI services without worrying about managing Kubernetes manually."
"Through Amazon EKS, we can have the blue-green deployment very easily."
"I would rate the stability of Amazon EKS ten out of ten, indicating it is highly stable."
"The most valuable feature is the computing speed."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The main benefits from using Amazon EKS include it being a well-tested product that we can use to deploy our workload; its management system is very efficient, we can deploy things very easily and resolve our issues efficiently, and it has deep AWS integration and a managed control plane."
"The most beneficial aspect of Amazon EKS is that it helps manage the Kubernetes master node, so I don't need to maintain the master node, including tasks like upgrading."
"The solution's support and its automation tool that ensures we are secure and appropriately configured are the most valuable features of Azure Red Hat OpenShift."
"In Kubernetes, when traffic goes out of a pod, it has to have its own IP address. Every service that's going out requires another IP. But with OpenShift, you don't have to deal with any of those IPs because they use NAT."
"Technical support from Red Hat is very good."
"The most valuable features of the solution are accessibility and scalability."
"The functions and features in Azure Red Hat OpenShift that I have found most valuable are that it is a platform that is baked into Azure, and since it is baked into Azure, it is managed operation by Azure, which takes out the complexity of the infrastructure management and day two operations when compared with on-premise OpenShift."
"I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."
"It supports AKS and other projects like Kubernetes or EKS."
"As a consulting company, we implement Azure Red Hat OpenShift for our clients, who appreciate its integration capabilities for enhancing cloud operations. While we handle implementation, build processes, and automation, the operational responsibility lies with the customer. The service provides basic processes and support from Red Hat and Microsoft, which benefits clients by allowing them to focus on their business rather than regular operations like cluster upgrades."
 

Cons

"They could add logging features. At present, we use external tools to increase and decrease the number of instances."
"I would like to see a warm-up time for AWS Fargate, similar to what GCP Cloud Run has."
"The solution is quite costly and developers will start exploring other solutions or moving their workloads to other clouds if costs aren't reduced."
"Amazon EKS needs to improve customer operations and technical support."
"The solution's graphical interface is not the best."
"The tool's setup is complex."
"I think if new features, especially AI capabilities, are developed for Amazon EKS, it will enhance the product as it allows us to continually improve our applications."
"The goal and idea behind microservices are to always be available and capable of handling any load, no matter how many requests come through...All of these services are great, but I also think it would be useful to have the same technology available in a miniature resource size, enabling the same applications and services to run on a small machine."
"They need to improve the core licensing model."
"One of the things to notice is that this product can be expensive."
"I would like Azure Red Hat OpenShift to be more open to new frameworks and languages. Currently, if I create a pod with Rust, it doesn't work in OpenShift, and I must create a layer of interpretation."
"There is room for improvement in terms of orchestration. While Azure orchestration offers valuable features, it's worth noting that it may not match the level of orchestration provided by Kubernetes itself."
"I would rate the technical support from Microsoft as six."
"Azure Red Hat OpenShift's support should be improved."
"Technically, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is fine. However, its marketing could be improved, especially when compared to the robust marketing efforts of Azure, HPE, and Nutanix."
"Regarding room for improvement, there's always room, but it's mainly about Azure itself rather than Azure Red Hat OpenShift. Azure is not as advanced as AWS in terms of supported services. AWS is the leader in this area. However, there's no need for service improvement in Azure Red Hat OpenShift as the service is excellent. I don't need additional features because I can customize it according to the customer's needs."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would like a cheaper version of it."
"The price could be cheaper. I would rate it as seven out of ten."
"The solution is more expensive than other competitors and does not require a license."
"Amazon EKS is expensive."
"Amazon EKS is quite pricey, but the functionality it provides is worth it."
"The solution is quite costly and developers will start exploring other solutions or moving their workloads to other clouds if costs aren't reduced."
"The solution is cheaper than one of its competitors."
"The product is available at such a huge scale in the market since the resources that are offered under the tool are competitively priced and available at a much cheaper rate compared to other solutions."
"Azure Red Hat OpenShift is not a low-price solution; it's expensive. Pricing depends on the strategy and whether you buy it directly from Red Hat or the Azure portal. Additionally, some customers may need a complete disaster recovery solution, which requires additional licensing and software products for implementation, such as backups."
"It is expensive compared to a similar product."
"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"Compared to other cloud environments like Amazon or Google, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Management solutions are best for your needs.
902,270 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business36
Midsize Enterprise18
Large Enterprise49
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon EKS?
Pricing for Amazon EKS is quite good, because you can choose the instances which are running under the hood. If you wanted to use smaller machine types, you can control your cost quite well. You ar...
What needs improvement with Amazon EKS?
One limitation I have found with using Amazon EKS is that there is a very big learning curve. It is very complicated to use the tool. I have used Google's GKE which offers an easier framework becau...
What advice do you have for others considering Amazon EKS?
Overall, Amazon EKS is a very good tool to use and it is commonly used in the industry. However, GKE is easier to use and some of the management is abstracted away, which is not the case with Amazo...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
The pricing for OpenShift is similar to other solutions like Docker ( /products/docker-37146-reviews ) Studio. The plans with ARO and AWS are standard in the market. However, using OpenShift on-pre...
What needs improvement with Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
A potential area for improvement for Azure Red Hat OpenShift is to see managed identity support and ensure that some of the security features are not conflicting with Azure or Azure product feature...
What is your primary use case for Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
My use case for Azure Red Hat OpenShift is for an employee engagement application and HR, and I have also used it for an agentic bot.
 

Also Known As

Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

GoDaddy, Pearson, FICO, Intuit, Verizon, Honeywell, Logicworks, RetailMeNot, LogMeIn, Conde Nast, mercari, Trainline, Axway
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Kubernetes and others in Container Management. Updated: June 2026.
902,270 professionals have used our research since 2012.