Google Kubernetes Engine vs Komodor comparison

Read 5 Komodor reviews

1,322 Views
526 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Google Kubernetes Engine

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 13, 2024

In the Kubernetes ecosystem, Google Kubernetes Engine and Komodor offer unique solutions. Google Kubernetes Engine stands out for its scalability and integration within Google Cloud, providing a robust infrastructure. Komodor, meanwhile, focuses on enhancing efficiency with observability tools, excellent for troubleshooting.

Features: Google Kubernetes Engine provides integrated management and orchestration like auto-scaling, multi-cluster support, and comprehensive cloud application management. Komodor offers diagnostic tools including incident timelines, root cause analysis, and an intuitive interface geared towards enhancing operational efficiency in Kubernetes environments.

Room for Improvement: Google Kubernetes Engine could improve its customer service response times and simplify the complexities tied to extensive integrations. Additionally, enhancing cost efficiency for resource-heavy operations could be advantageous. Komodor may need better integration with non-Kubernetes ecosystems, expanded documentation for wider user adoption, and improved scalability for handling larger enterprise needs.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Google Kubernetes Engine ensures easy deployment with solid support for enterprises familiar with Google Cloud Platform, although service may be slower due to scale. Komodor offers rapid setup, easing onboarding with a user-friendly interface, and provides personalized, hands-on customer service that benefits newcomers to Kubernetes.

Pricing and ROI: Google Kubernetes Engine's pricing is usage-based, which can increase with higher resource consumption, but offers a comprehensive feature set. Komodor's competitive pricing is focused on value through specialized monitoring, potentially offering better ROI for organizations prioritizing operational efficiency and reduced downtime.

To learn more, read our detailed Google Kubernetes Engine vs. Komodor Report (Updated: June 2025).

Google Kubernetes Engine vs. Komodor

Download the complete report

Helped 857,162 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

Google Kubernetes Engine

Ranking in Container Management

10th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Komodor

Ranking in Container Management

13th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

9.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Container Management category, the mindshare of Google Kubernetes Engine is 2.1%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Komodor is 4.1%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Container Management

Featured Reviews

Immánuel Fodor

Product Manager at Traefik Labs

The auto-scaling feature ensures that we only use resources when needed

The most valuable aspect of Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) is its managed nature, which significantly reduces the burden on our platform team. Features like auto-scaling are highly beneficial for both handling traffic spikes and optimizing costs. Furthermore, Google's promise of good SLA availability, with the service being available in different locations, adds to its robustness.

Read full review

Jacek Kisynski

Senior Staff Software Developer at Visier

Makes it easier for our development team to "own" Kubernetes, saving our SRE team time

There's nothing in particular that is wrong with Komodor. It's hard to say that there's something we would really like to see improved. I hope that the cost analytics and resource usage allocation areas will see further development. For example, where we can now see if the pods are over- or under-provisioned, I wouldn't mind higher-level development. I would like to see if we're utilizing nodes in the cluster, if pod allocation is optimal, how much idling we have, and whether we scale up and down efficiently. I would like to see them help us optimize costs further. Because, as our company grows and our clusters get busier and busier, any inefficiency is a lot of money wasted. That's definitely high on our wish list: anything that helps us track wasted resources. I am looking forward to using AI-powered troubleshooting workflow that Komodor unrolled recently.

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 aspect of Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) is its managed nature, which significantly reduces the burden on our platform team."

"The logs are important for detecting problems in our clusters."

"The most valuable feature of Google Kubernetes Engine is how you can automatically scale and load balance."

"Its functionalities, such as computing the namespaces, clusters, pods, and restart logs, are easy to use."

"The scalability is the best feature."

"The features are typical Kubernetes, but Google One offers a better GUI-based deployment. It's more sophisticated and integrates well with other services, providing a better customer experience."

"I am impressed with the product's output scaling."

"It is easy to use and deploy."

More Google Kubernetes Engine pros

"Komodor's multi-cluster centralized event timeline is the most valuable feature."

"The more time we use Komodor the more we save. Currently, we have seen around a ten percent return on investment."

"The event timeline has been super helpful, enabling us to overlay node events in the same timeline as deployment events... That helps an engineer very quickly troubleshoot without having to do too much digging."

"The most valuable aspect is the speed with which I can narrow down what's going on. Usually, I look at the overview of events and then the timeline of an event and the status of the logs to quickly check what's happening or what has happened."

"The service overview is definitely the most valuable feature. With it, I can see all the services and see if they're healthy or not without having to go specifically into each workflow individually. It has been immensely helpful for us whenever we've had network issues or other such issues. We've been able to use Komodor and see at a glance where there might be potential issues."

Cons

"I use the Firebase tool with GKE and it would be helpful if the solution can give notifications when we reach the budget limit."

"The primary area for improvement would be the complexity involved when working with Google Kubernetes Engine, especially when using Terraform."

"The solution does not have a visual interface."

"t is not very stable."

"The management UI could be improved. When looking at the web interface, it feels kind of slow due to the many features involved."

"There is room for improvement in this solution. For example, auto-scaling can be complex. We expect it to be easier to set up and manage, even for our customers."

"The product could be cheaper."

"The user interface is a bit confusing sometimes. You need to navigate between the various consoles we have. It's hard to figure out where things are. It's frustrating. The documentation could be a bit better."

More Google Kubernetes Engine cons

"I like the alerts that Komodor provides, but I think the alert interface could be improved."

"Komodor's visibility could be improved."

"I would like to see improvements in how the product is installed. We've already communicated these things directly to Komodor. One feature we would like to see is for Komodor to be highly available on the clusters. Currently, it's only able to run in one instance within the cluster."

"One thing we don't have visibility into, which I would love to have, is metrics, such as user logins and usage. It's really hard to know what people are doing when I don't have any metrics on that directly."

"I hope that the cost analytics and resource usage allocation areas will see further development. For example, where we can now see if the pods are over- or under-provisioned, I wouldn't mind higher-level development."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Currently, it costs around $1000 per month which sorted our deployment. So once we get more clients, having a huge suffix, costs can go up."

"The product is a little bit expensive."

"I would rate Kubernetes' pricing four out of five."

"I rate the product's price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price. The product is competitively priced."

"Pricing is a bit expensive compared to some other products, but it's acceptable."

"We are planning to use external support, and hire a commercial partner for it."

"Its pricing is good. They bill us only per user. That's nice."

"The pricing for GKE is dependent on the type of machine or virtual machine (VM) that is selected for the nodes in the cluster. There is a degree of flexibility in choosing the specifications of the machine, such as the number of CPUs, GPUs, and so on. Google provides a variety of options, allowing the user to create the desired cluster composition. However, the cost can be quite steep when it comes to regional clusters, which are necessary for high availability and failover. This redundancy is crucial for businesses and is required to handle an increase in requests in case of any issues in one region, such as jumping to a different region in case of a failure in the Toronto region. While it may be tempting to choose the cheapest type of machines, this may result in a limited capacity and user numbers, requiring over-provisioning to handle additional requests, such as those for a web application."

More Google Kubernetes Engine pricing and cost advice

"We pay according to the number of resources we have; if we are a small start-up, we have fewer resources and thus pay less."

"As far as I can recall, the licensing cost was fair."

"Other options pop up, but Komodor's pricing works well for our use case. It's fair, and we appreciate it. A lot of other vendors price their solutions in a way that would cost us disproportionately more money than they should. Komodor's pricing is reasonable in the way they calculate usage and value."

"The licensing model is fine. It is per node, which is good, but the pricing is high. Currently, I am fine with it, but I am a little concerned about the pricing as we scale. So, it is on the higher end. On a scale of one to ten, where ten is the most expensive, Komodor is a seven."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

857,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

21%

Computer Software Company

12%

Retailer

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

16%

Wellness & Fitness Company

13%

Comms Service Provider

10%

Media Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Google Kubernetes Engine?

The product has no downtime.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google Kubernetes Engine?

The on-demand nodes are quite expensive, so we now use spot machines.

What needs improvement with Google Kubernetes Engine?

Gemini could be more integrated with Google Kubernetes Engine ( /products/google-kubernetes-engine-reviews ). For example, it would be helpful if I could easily find log information in a particular...

What do you like most about Komodor?

The most valuable aspect is the speed with which I can narrow down what's going on. Usually, I look at the overview of events and then the timeline of an event and the status of the logs to quickly...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Komodor?

The licensing model is fine. It is per node, which is good, but the pricing is high. Currently, I am fine with it, but I am a little concerned about the pricing as we scale. So, it is on the higher...

What needs improvement with Komodor?

Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform vs Google Kubernetes Engine

Comparisons

Compared 24% of the time

Akamai Connected Cloud (Linode) vs Google Kubernetes Engine

Compared 19% of the time

VMware Tanzu Platform vs Google Kubernetes Engine

Compared 16% of the time

Rancher Labs vs Google Kubernetes Engine

Compared 12% of the time

Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE vs Google Kubernetes Engine

Compared 10% of the time

More Google Kubernetes Engine Competitors

Portainer vs Komodor

Compared 82% of the time

Rancher Labs vs Komodor

Compared 16% of the time

Kubernetes vs Komodor

Compared 3% of the time

More Komodor Competitors

Product Reports

Google Kubernetes Engine

Download Google Kubernetes Engine product report

Download Komodor product report

Also Known As

GKE

No data available

Overview

Kubernetes Engine is a managed, production-ready environment for deploying containerized applications. It brings our latest innovations in developer productivity, resource efficiency, automated operations, and open source flexibility to accelerate your time to market.

Google

Komodor is the missing piece in your DevOps toolchain - offering one unified platform from which you can gain a deep understanding of all of your system events and changes. We integrate with all of your tools, monitor changes and alerts and organize information on a clear digestible dashboard and provide you with the right context at the right time.

Sample Customers

Philips Lighting, Alpha Vertex, GroupBy, BQ

Information Not Available

Google Kubernetes Engine vs. Komodor