Amazon S3 vs NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud comparison

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and NetApp are both solutions in the Public Cloud Storage Services category. Amazon Web Services (AWS) is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.8, while NetApp is ranked #19. Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds a 14.1% mindshare in PCSS, compared to NetApp’s 1.0% mindshare. Additionally, 98% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of NetApp users who would recommend it.

Amazon S3

Read 83 Amazon S3 reviews

2,775 Views
2,720 Comparison Views

98% willing to recommend

NetApp Cloud Volumes Servic...

Read 3 NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud reviews

420 Views
202 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Amazon S3

NetApp Cloud Volumes Servic...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 1, 2024

Amazon S3 and NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud compete in the cloud storage solutions category. Amazon S3 has the upper hand in integration options while NetApp Cloud Volumes Service is known for its performance and data management capabilities.

Features: Amazon S3 offers extensive integration with various AWS services, cross-replication, and intelligent tiering. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service provides high performance, supports multiprotocol data access, and excels in specialized performance and data management.

Room for Improvement: Amazon S3 could enhance its performance and consistency in data retrieval times and improve response times of their customer service. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service could benefit from better support for certain Google Cloud Platform services, enhanced documentation, and improved integration.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Amazon S3 offers straightforward deployment, strong community support, and comprehensive documentation. Its customer service is efficient but response times could be improved. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service features user-friendly deployment, responsive customer service, and expert guidance.

Pricing and ROI: Amazon S3 provides flexible pricing models that are cost-effective for large-scale storage needs, though there are concerns about unpredictable costs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service has higher initial costs but offers good ROI due to its enhanced performance and reliability.

To learn more, read our detailed Amazon S3 vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Amazon S3 vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 869,202 peers since 2012

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

Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services

2nd

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

NetApp Cloud Volumes Servic...

Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services

19th

Average Rating

9.4

Reviews Sentiment

8.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Migration (22nd), Cloud Storage (17th)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Public Cloud Storage Services category, the mindshare of Amazon S3 is 14.1%, up from 11.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud is 1.0%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Public Cloud Storage Services Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Amazon S3	14.1%
NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud	1.0%
Other	84.9%

Public Cloud Storage Services

Featured Reviews

Roberto Costa

Senior Data & AI Engineer at Imprint

Have used multiple features effectively and find the pricing reasonable

What I appreciate most about Amazon S3 is the tiering of the objects; with the tiering, we can determine if an object won't be accessed frequently and send it to cold storage or a Glacier storage unit, which greatly lowers AWS costs. The inventory feature, called S3 Inventory, is a cool feature as well. The object access point is another notable feature. Amazon S3 has many useful features; I can simply host my website, which has to be a static web page, but even so, it's beneficial to put my code inside of Amazon S3 as a static website that people worldwide can access. I have worked with many petabytes of data stored in Amazon S3, and I have never had any performance issues, stability issues, or anything similar.

Read full review

Colin Constable

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features of Amazon S3 are the performance and hibernation data options. Additionally, there is a feature that provides faster website access that is helpful."

"We have cold storage here, and I think that's useful. When it comes to commercialization, it's cheaper to put data that you won't be using into the data storage. You only use a little bit of the data needed each day for your transition, so you pay less."

"Amazon S3 is scalable and available."

"The most valuable feature is the sharing capabilities."

"What I found most valuable in Amazon S3 is its versioning feature. I also like that you can create pre-signed URLs on the solution."

"I have worked with many petabytes of data stored in Amazon S3, and I have never had any performance issues, stability issues, or anything similar."

"The product's deployment phase is easy."

"The most valuable features of Amazon S3 are compatibility and reliability."

More Amazon S3 pros

"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."

"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."

"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."

Cons

"The service could improve by offering mobile backups, which would be great since using Google Backup is costly."

"The stability of the solution has room for improvement."

"There is a limitation with the data upload size, such as the five terabytes restriction. I would like to see an increase in the data upload limit, similar to DynamoDB, where there is no data limit."

"The UI should be more user-friendly."

"I would like to see an easier setup that doesn't require as much training."

"The pricing and licensing are pretty complex."

"Amazon S3 could improve by providing some type of storage notification."

"An encryption mechanism and storage optimization could be added."

More Amazon S3 cons

"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. 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."

"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

"Not many products in the market beat the solution in terms of quality or price."

"The cost of Amazon S3 is low. For R & D purposes there is a free option available. There is a license needed to use the solution."

"The pricing for Amazon S3 is reasonable, so price-wise, it's a seven out of ten."

"I have seen the pricing on AWS, but I believe it's a discount price for organizations."

"I know it is very inexpensive compared to other solutions."

"The cost of Amazon S3 could be better. As the number of data increases, you'll pay more for Amazon S3. It's around $200, which is okay, but my company uses it less often."

"Amazon S3 is a cost-effective solution compared to the others."

"The tool's licensing costs are yearly. I rate it a six to seven out of ten."

More Amazon S3 pricing and cost advice

"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."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Public Cloud Storage Services solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

869,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

University

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

22%

Manufacturing Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

18%

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	33
Midsize Enterprise	17
Large Enterprise	38

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Amazon S3?

We can easily connect to the AWS resources.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon S3?

AWS pricing for Amazon S3 starts at a higher cost, particularly in the standard class. However, with lifecycle management policies, costs can be optimized over time. On a scale from one to ten, I w...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Amazon S3?

That is a hard question; I cannot think of any improvements right now because all the necessary features are already included in Amazon S3. One aspect I would mention is the naming in Amazon S3. If...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP vs Amazon S3

Compared 15% of the time

Google Cloud Storage vs Amazon S3

Compared 12% of the time

Microsoft Azure File Storage vs Amazon S3

Compared 9% of the time

Oracle Cloud Object Storage vs Amazon S3

Compared 8% of the time

Rackspace Cloud Files vs Amazon S3

Compared 7% of the time

More Amazon S3 Competitors

Google Cloud Storage vs NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

Compared 33% of the time

Amazon FSx vs NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

Compared 25% of the time

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP vs NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

Compared 22% of the time

Dropbox Business - Enterprise vs NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

Compared 20% of the time

More NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Amazon S3

October 2025

Download Amazon S3 product report

Buyer's Guide

NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

September 2025

NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud report

Download NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud product report

Also Known As

S3, Simple Storage Service

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

Amazon Simple Storage Service is storage for the Internet. It is designed to make web-scale computing easier for developers.

Amazon S3 has a simple web services interface that you can use to store and retrieve any amount of data, at any time, from anywhere on the web. It gives any developer access to the same highly scalable, reliable, fast, inexpensive data storage infrastructure that Amazon uses to run its own global network of web sites. The service aims to maximize benefits of scale and to pass those benefits on to developers.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

NetApp^® Cloud Volumes for Google Cloud is a fully managed or self-managed file service that is integrated into Google Cloud with the multiprotocol support, performance, and availability required to run business-critical applications. It is designed to provide massively parallel shared access to thousands of Google Compute Engine and Google Kubernetes Engine instances, enabling your applications to achieve high levels of aggregate throughput and IOPS with consistent low latencies.

Use cases. Customers can use the service to migrate existing enterprise applications to Google Cloud. Other use cases include hybrid deployments, multicloud mobility, big data analytics, web serving and content management, application development and testing, media and entertainment workflows, database backups, container storage, and more.

Features. Multiple performance tiers, standard file interfaces, advanced data management, metered service, fully managed service, native service experience, integrated support, and integrated billing.

For more information:

NetApp: https://cloud.netapp.com/cloud-volumes-service-for-gcp

Google: https://cloud.google.com/netapp

NetApp

Sample Customers

Netflix, Airbnb, Thomson Reuters, Zillow, Alert Logic

Atos, Bandwidth, Wuxi NextCode

Buyer's Guide

Amazon S3 vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

September 2025

Free Report: Amazon S3 vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon S3 vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

869,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Amazon S3 vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud report.

See our list of best Public Cloud Storage Services vendors.

We monitor all Public Cloud Storage Services reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.