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

Amazon WorkSpaces vs Dizzion comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 18, 2026

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 WorkSpaces
Ranking in Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI)
11th
Ranking in Desktop as a Service (DaaS)
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Dizzion
Ranking in Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI)
16th
Ranking in Desktop as a Service (DaaS)
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Desktop as a Service (DaaS) category, the mindshare of Amazon WorkSpaces is 12.6%, down from 18.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Dizzion is 14.3%, up from 5.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Desktop as a Service (DaaS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Amazon WorkSpaces12.6%
Dizzion14.3%
Other73.1%
Desktop as a Service (DaaS)
 

Featured Reviews

JiteshRathod - PeerSpot reviewer
Expert Engineer at Apexon
Remote teams have gained secure, consistent test environments and onboarding stays streamlined
Desired improvements for Amazon WorkSpaces include faster and more flexible image updates, incremental image updates, patch-only updates, and a much faster push of software configuration changes to all workspaces, as well as improved cursor shutters and remote screen jitter. Amazon WorkSpaces can sometimes function as a black box, making it difficult to diagnose why a workspace is slow on any given day due to limited visibility into network latency from the client, real-time CPU and GPU utilization, and storage bottlenecks. Improvements are needed for built-in performance dashboards, clearer latency metrics, connection health reports, and root cause suggestions that distinguish between local network and VPC issues.
Hamada Farag - PeerSpot reviewer
Technology Consultant at Beta Information Technology
A cost-effective and streamlined virtual desktop infrastructure solution with a user-friendly interface and simplified management
The singular management interface is crucial, particularly for the operations team as it minimizes complexity and enhances operational efficiency. The simplicity of the management tools is a key highlight, especially when compared to other solutions like Citrix, where there is often complexity due to various components such as controllers, storefronts, and different servers.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Persistent storage helps to maintain consistency and data availability across sessions."
"We can work remotely using the solution."
"For anyone looking at the solution, I can say that it is a good solution and within well-defined price ranges, and a very scalable one."
"The experience is seamless and there is no delay. The performance is very good. Initial startup times is a little bit of wait time, but it is bearable."
"It has good speed and connects well with computers."
"Security, streaming, faster performance, scalability, and the fact that it is very much cost-effective, are some of the solution's valuable features."
"The best feature is that it operates very quickly. It depends on the regional location. If we choose a nearby location, nearby servers, it will be best for users to use."
"The infrastructure is readily available, with minimal latency, which each user can benefit from."
"The pricing of the solution and management are good features."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good."
"Nutanix Frame is easy to install, manage, and upgrade."
"The user experience is quite good."
"The singular management interface is crucial, particularly for the operations team as it minimizes complexity and enhances operational efficiency."
 

Cons

"Amazon WorkSpaces needs to improve on releasing the most number of patches immediately as quickly as possible. And they need to enable more USB options to connect a mobile phone to that particular workspace."
"One area that can be improved is the ability to install third-party apps."
"There is always scope of improvement in the stability."
"If they had a cheaper option for graphics pro, I think that it would be beneficial and I would use it."
"I am not satisfied with the billing part because sometimes it bills for huge usage we are not aware of when we trigger every EC2 instance or every RDS instance."
"Configuration was a bit complicated at first but manageable."
"The agent sometimes has connectivity issues, but otherwise, it's good."
"An area that could be improved is it could work better on VPN. On VPN, it gets some issues, and frequent disconnections happen."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"The solution can be made faster and it should improve performance wise."
"As the solution is not completely straightforward, you do need some experience to configure and implement it."
"It would be highly beneficial if they could offer a version that is entirely on-premises, eliminating the need for cloud connection except for data access."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The bundle works out to be approximately $20.00 per month."
"We need to spend some amount for the support. Without money, they won't respond."
"The pricing is based on consumption. You pay for each process based on the transactions you make."
"Price-wise Amazon Workspaces is cheaper than most services available."
"The solution is expensive."
"They have hourly and monthly pricing, and because our use case is, more of a sporadic use, so I go for hourly pricing. Again, the details of the pricing is handled by the procurement. From an end user perspective, pay as you use hourly is suitable"
"It is very expensive."
"There are several different options available, but it can range anywhere from $85 to $150 a month per machine."
"Nutanix Frame is a very expensive solution."
"The licensing is based on the number of users of the solution."
"The pricing of the solution is very good."
"It is a cost-effective option with comparable functionality to competitors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Desktop as a Service (DaaS) solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Performing Arts
13%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Performing Arts
13%
Government
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise10
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon WorkSpaces?
For Amazon WorkSpaces pricing, I think it is affordable; it is a final decision made through the management part. I am not satisfied with the billing part because sometimes it bills for huge usage ...
What needs improvement with Amazon WorkSpaces?
Desired improvements for Amazon WorkSpaces include faster and more flexible image updates, incremental image updates, patch-only updates, and a much faster push of software configuration changes to...
What is your primary use case for Amazon WorkSpaces?
Amazon WorkSpaces is used to provide a consistent environment for remote workers for testing purposes. Software testing is typically run on those desktops.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

WorkSpaces
Nutanix Xi Frame, Nutanix Frame
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

GrubHub, Endemol Shine Nederland, CMC Property Services
JetBlue, International Speedway Corporation, SAIC Volkswagen
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon WorkSpaces vs. Dizzion and other solutions. Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.