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

Amazon S3 Glacier vs NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 1, 2024

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 S3 Glacier
Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
NetApp Cloud Volumes Servic...
Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services
17th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (24th), Cloud Storage (19th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Public Cloud Storage Services category, the mindshare of Amazon S3 Glacier is 10.3%, down from 15.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud is 3.5%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Public Cloud Storage Services Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Amazon S3 Glacier10.3%
NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud3.5%
Other86.2%
Public Cloud Storage Services
 

Featured Reviews

PF
Project Engineer at Astellas Pharma US
Archiving data has reduced storage costs and provides reliable long‑term retention
We have not really come across any downsides for us. It is possible that the retrieval of data may be expensive, which could be an issue, but we have not experienced that in fairness. Integration with our policies would be beneficial. We have policies for our systems where we delete data after a certain number of years, and having integration with Amazon S3 Glacier would be good. Having a guarantee that Amazon S3 Glacier would persist for the amount of time that we require in our archives would be valuable. In other words, Amazon would need to commit to support for the period we need. We could be talking about 20 years or longer. We cannot always move to the next version because we need to maintain old systems and legacy systems in order to maintain archives. A guarantee around support would be a good thing to have.
CC
Co-Founder at Atsign
Enables us to fine-tune storage and capacity on the fly as our needs grow or shrink over time
NetApp delivers High Availability. It's critical to our work. That was the main driver for using NetApp. We have a highly resilient service and if you have a highly resilient service, you are only as resilient as the least resilient part of your infrastructure. That's what we were having trouble with our file system before. It was becoming troublesome, so we needed to find something that was much more highly resilient so that's why we moved to NetApp. The complexity of moving large numbers of files to the cloud depends on what you're trying to do. But for us, it was really simple. I imagine for large enterprise customers it is probably pretty tricky. They're probably on all different technologies inside a large corporation and they may or may not have very large pipes going to them. So if you're in a data center to the cloud then it's going to be easy, but if you have hundreds of branches like if you're a bank and have lots of branch banks, they might have very small pipes out to the internet. It might take forever. In our use case everything's brand new files, so it was pretty trivial. We didn't migrate to the cloud, we were already on the cloud, so it was a nonissue for us. NetApp enables us to share data across VMs. It actually reduced the amount of data storage we need. We were having to have storage attached to each VM. And now we can aggregate that storage across multiple VMs, so that actually gave us a net reduction, which was a good thing. We switched from using block storage to file storage to share data between our VMs. It made it easier, frankly but I worry about the scalability in the future. For the moment it made life easier. We were using block and then we moved back to file with NetApp.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The cost is high, which I think is one of the best features of the product."
"I find Amazon S3 Glacier valuable for storing various documents like purchase orders, standard documents, and drawings."
"The solution is great for storing data you don't usually need access to. It's also well-integrated with Amazon S3."
"Amazon S3 Glacier is easy to use. The platform is straightforward, and the interfaces are user-friendly and responsive. Even with a limited budget, you can train someone without an AWS certification to use it. With on-the-job training, you can ensure they understand what needs to be done to use the service."
"The product is easy to use."
"The tool is simple to use and not very expensive."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Its auto-scaling capabilities allow us to add data continuously without needing to pre-provision storage."
"High availability is very important to us because we have a production environment. High availability is the highest priority for us to continue keeping our systems running."
"In terms of its storage snapshot efficiencies, the service is highly efficient. We are only doing things in small batches right now because we have not converted all of the data, but we have tested them in the Google Cloud and they work efficiently."
"It is a good service for high availability that is very easy to configure."
"Overall, they have very impressive technologies."
"Storage was taking up maybe 10 to 20% of my life at the startup, and now it takes up zero."
"Storage was taking up maybe 10 to 20% of my life at the startup, and now it takes up zero. I was personally running all the infrastructure for the company. Now that we've moved to NetApp, I don't have to worry about making sure it's up and running. It's made my life personally much better."
 

Cons

"However, improvement is needed in pricing and support systems."
"The product needs to improve cloud security."
"Pricing is my concern; this is the only concern so far."
"Amazon S3 Glacier is a cheaper tool if you're running it on-prem, but it is expensive if deployed on the cloud."
"The cost can be lower."
"I am unsure if the product provides good integration capabilities. From an improvement perspective, I want the tool to provide easier integration features."
"The cost of retrieval in Glacier is quite high."
"I would like to see the retrieval time reduced. You have to wait a day to get your data."
"The user interface has room for improvement. We would like this service to be more integrated with Azure, which is very easy to manage and use. It was easy to create volumes and add capacity pools in Azure, but in Google Cloud, we can only create separate volumes. We need more management or configuration options in the user interface."
"It would help if they increased the area in which they employ artificial intelligence, by starting to do assessments on the environments, to project those. They're not using any AI tools, currently, on the administrative side."
"The user interface has room for improvement."
"I would like for the sales team to get in contact more often and let me know what I should be doing next, what we should be doing about new features. So it would be nice if I heard a little bit more from him. From a technology perspective, I have no complaints."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is cheap."
"We don't pay for licenses. We pay based on consumption data, considering how much data is stored."
"Amazon S3 Glacier is a cost-effective solution for archiving."
"Amazon S3 Glacier is not an expensive solution, and it has a pay-as-you-go pricing model."
"Amazon S3 Glacier has good pricing."
"Amazon S3 Glacier is a little expensive solution."
"There is no license, you pay for what you use."
"The tool is too expensive."
"We don't need so much space, and there is no option to pay as we go or use just what we need. Also, the only way to increase performance is by increasing the level of the service."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Public Cloud Storage Services solutions are best for your needs.
909,647 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
7%
Performing Arts
5%
Construction Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business25
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise16
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Amazon's S3 Glacier or EBS (Elastic Block Store)?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon's S3 Glacier or Elastic Block Store data storage software was the better fit for us. We decided to go with Amazon's S3 Glacier, whi...
What needs improvement with Amazon S3 Glacier?
We have not really come across any downsides for us. It is possible that the retrieval of data may be expensive, which could be an issue, but we have not experienced that in fairness. Integration w...
What is your primary use case for Amazon S3 Glacier?
We were using Amazon S3 Glacier, and I have experience with this solution. We had an S3 bucket that we were using about a year ago. We just started using Amazon S3 Glacier, and overall, I have been...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Amazon Glacier
CVS for Google Cloud, NetApp CVS for Google Cloud, Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud, Cloud Volumes Service for GCP, NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for GCP
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

King Cpunty, Illumina, Backupify, Nearmap.com, Scribd, Baylor College of Medicine, SoundCloud
Atos, Bandwidth, Wuxi NextCode
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon S3 Glacier vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
909,647 professionals have used our research since 2012.