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

Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs Google Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 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

Azure Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
17th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Google Cloud
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the PaaS Clouds category, the mindshare of Azure Red Hat OpenShift is 1.2%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Google Cloud is 5.8%, up from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
PaaS Clouds Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Google Cloud5.8%
Azure Red Hat OpenShift1.2%
Other93.0%
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

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.
AnjaneyaVara Prasad - PeerSpot reviewer
Solution Architect at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Cloud services have reduced on‑prem hardware costs and now support flexible microservices workloads
Regarding potential areas of improvement for Google Cloud, considering that they are providing 300 plus services, some services could be improved. For example, if I am facing some network troubleshooting issue in GKE in Google Cloud, I have to dig deeply and enable some special logs, such as flow logs. To enable that, it is chargeable. At least for basic services, they should give end-to-end support. In terms of end-to-end support, if I am purchasing one firewall from Google and using that firewall, all firewall-related services should be free. If I want to troubleshoot something deep and perform deep troubleshooting, you have to enable some additional logs. That is not that good. If I have to enable additional logs and want to store them into Google Cloud storage, which is similar to an S3 bucket, it is again chargeable. Those kinds of things should be given as part of the package. If you take firewall, all firewall-related logs, activities, and diagnostics everything should come as one package. If you want to do some deep analysis, you have to enable these logs, and for that you have to store them in the cloud storage, which is again chargeable. We should not have those kinds of things.Regarding additional costs, it can vary case by case. If I want to do deep analysis, I have to enable some logs, and for those logs, Google is charging. I am already paying for my virtual firewall from Google, and I am paying the cost for that. If I want to do some further troubleshooting and enable some low-level logs, they are charging for that. So these are the kinds of things I am talking about. To do very deep-level troubleshooting and enable additional logs, they will be charging. Not only Google, but all clouds are charging for this. Functionality-wise, Google Cloud is fine. In terms of virtual machine deployment or VM instance, the functionality is good.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Red Hat is a very stable product with good integration with products such as Kubernetes, and it also offers migration tools."
"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."
"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."
"I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."
"Technical support from Red Hat is very good."
"It supports AKS and other projects like Kubernetes or EKS."
"The most valuable features of the solution are accessibility and scalability."
"It has a feature to automatically scale up or scale down. If my application is running in peak hours, it will automatically increase."
"The best part of Google Cloud is that it is cheaper than the competitors, and it is easy to set up, monitor, and manage, as you can just connect and start using it through a browser within a few minutes."
"This platform is popular with technical users because of the abilities for customization and fine-tuning performance."
"People see the ease, simplicity, and again the Ubiquiti of the service attached to it."
"Google Cloud is 100 percent stable."
"The stability is good with Google Cloud."
"Google Cloud is perceived as a cost-effective and user-friendly option, especially compared to AWS. The current affordability and ease of use make it suitable for medium-sized companies. While the complexity may increase in the future, for now, Google Cloud is considered easy to use."
"My customers appreciate all the features that Google Cloud has to offer. They are looking for solutions for computing engines, storage, web hosting, and various other needs. The most useful feature depends on their specific requirements and how they plan to utilize Google Cloud. Each customer has their own unique set of needs and the Google Cloud provides a range of options to meet those needs."
"The availability has been increased."
 

Cons

"Azure Red Hat OpenShift's support should be improved."
"The product is expensive."
"I would rate the technical support from Microsoft as six."
"One of the things to notice is that this product can be expensive."
"Automation could be improved."
"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 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."
"They need to improve the core licensing model."
"Lower pricing would make Google Cloud better."
"The price of the license could be cheaper."
"The price can be lowered significantly."
"To do very deep-level troubleshooting and enable additional logs, they will be charging."
"The user interface could be a bit better."
"Google Cloud should provide more introductory videos on how to get started. Currently, very few of these resources are available. Additionally, training on Google Cloud products is not very well streamlined. Users have to search for training, which can be quite complex."
"Uploading documents could be simplified."
"Microsoft's solution is more common, Google Cloud could improve by being more compatible with different platforms or entities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"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."
"Compared to other cloud environments like Amazon or Google, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is an expensive solution."
"It is expensive compared to a similar product."
"The solution is cheaper than AWS."
"This solution is worth the money we are paying. I would rate the pricing a three out of five."
"For the license, we didn't have to pay for any additional fees."
"The cost might be $10 a month per user, which is about $300 a month in total."
"Google Cloud is quite expensive, and I rate it at seven out of ten."
"Google offers a free account with minimal data backup and we can subscribe for more data."
"The price of Google Cloud is affordable compared to others services. I pay monthly for the service."
"We pay for a license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which PaaS Clouds solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business42
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise38
 

Questions from the Community

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.
What needs improvement with Google Cloud?
I think perhaps the usability of Google Cloud could be one of the things that might get improved. In terms of not having to type the whole instruction I need to input to the system, just maybe some...
What is your primary use case for Google Cloud?
My main use case for Google Cloud would be using the functions and the Vertex AI functionality, so mostly AI research and AI deployment. For my AI research and deployment, I use Vertex AI to extrac...
What advice do you have for others considering Google Cloud?
On a scale of 1 to 10, I rate Google Cloud a nine. I choose nine because it combines a unique set of tools that are actually helpful and impactful on my daily work. Regarding Google Cloud's AI capa...
 

Also Known As

No data available
GCP
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs. Google Cloud and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.