Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Google Kubernetes Engine vs Red Hat OpenShift comparison

Google and Red Hat are both solutions in the Container Management category. Google is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.1, while Red Hat is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.3. Google holds a 2.3% mindshare in CM, compared to Red Hat’s 2.4% mindshare. Additionally, 95% of Google users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.
Google Kubernetes Engine
Read 39 Google Kubernetes Engine reviews
  • 1,235 Views
  • 840 Comparison Views
95% willing to recommend
Red Hat OpenShift
Read 62 Red Hat OpenShift reviews
  • 11,087 Views
  • 554 Comparison Views
95% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive Summary
We performed a comparison between Google Kubernetes Engine and Red Hat OpenShift based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Container Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Google Kubernetes Engine vs. Red Hat OpenShift Report (Updated: July 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Google Kubernetes Engine vs. Red Hat OpenShift
July 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 865,140 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.1
Google Kubernetes Engine delivers positive ROI by reducing costs and improving efficiency, despite being costly for some services.
Sentiment score
7.8
Red Hat OpenShift improves productivity, offers cost savings, enhances system stability, and provides 15% ROI, especially in privacy-focused sectors.
By migrating from AWS to Google Cloud Platform, we have saved a lot of time and money.
For more quotes and insights, download the Google Kubernetes Engine report
With OpenShift combined with IBM Cloud App integration, I can spin an integration server in a second as compared to traditional methods, which could take days or weeks.
Moving to OpenShift resulted in increased system stability and reduced downtime, which contributed to operational efficiency.
It is always advisable to get the bare minimum that you need, and then add more when necessary.
For more quotes and insights, download the Red Hat OpenShift report
RT
Mikhael Ibrahim - PeerSpot reviewer
JU
Pratul Shukla - PeerSpot reviewer
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
3.7
Google Kubernetes Engine support varies; some users rely on forums, while others suggest improvements in response time and professionalism.
Sentiment score
6.8
Red Hat OpenShift support is mixed, praised for expertise but criticized for slow responses and varying experiences based on subscription.
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the Google Kubernetes Engine report
Red Hat's technical support is responsive and effective.
I have been pretty happy in the past with getting support from Red Hat.
Red Hat's technical support is good, and I would rate it a nine out of ten.
For more quotes and insights, download the Red Hat OpenShift report
JU
UM
AJ
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.0
Google Kubernetes Engine is praised for its scalability, efficient for microservices, with dynamic auto-scaling adjusting to organizational needs.
Sentiment score
7.5
Red Hat OpenShift offers efficient scalability with automated features, easy deployment, and adaptability, despite cost and infrastructure considerations.
The autoscaling capabilities of Google Kubernetes Engine have significantly impacted our operations.
For more quotes and insights, download the Google Kubernetes Engine report
The on-demand provisioning of pods and auto-scaling, whether horizontal or vertical, is the best part.
OpenShift's horizontal pod scaling is more effective and efficient than that used in Kubernetes, making it a superior choice for scalability.
Red Hat OpenShift scales excellently, with a rating of ten out of ten.
For more quotes and insights, download the Red Hat OpenShift report
RT
UM
Mikhael Ibrahim - PeerSpot reviewer
SA
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
Google Kubernetes Engine is highly stable, effectively managing demands with regular updates and scalable architecture for reliable operations.
Sentiment score
7.7
Red Hat OpenShift is praised for stability, reliability, and features like Blue-Green deployment, with minor issues quickly resolved.
If I have 100 replicas of containers and the traffic suddenly pushes to 1,000 within a fraction of a second, the selected machine type must be fast.
For more quotes and insights, download the Google Kubernetes Engine report
It provides better performance yet requires more resources compared to vanilla Kubernetes.
I've had my cluster running for over four years.
It performs well under load, providing the desired output.
For more quotes and insights, download the Red Hat OpenShift report
Parthasarathy T - PeerSpot reviewerMikhael Ibrahim - PeerSpot reviewer
JU
SA
 

Room For Improvement

Google Kubernetes Engine needs enhancements in security, user interface, scalability, pricing, and third-party integration for optimal performance.
Red Hat OpenShift needs better documentation, improved usability, and enhancements in security, integration, technical support, and installation processes.
When looking at the web interface, it feels kind of slow due to the many features involved.
Log observability could be made easier so someone from high school can use it without having technological expertise.
It would be helpful if I could easily find log information in a particular namespace without needing to write certain labels.
For more quotes and insights, download the Google Kubernetes Engine report
Learning OpenShift requires complex infrastructure, needing vCenter integration, more advanced answers, active directory, and more expensive hardware.
Red Hat OpenShift's biggest disadvantage is they do not provide any private cloud setup where we can host on our site using their services.
We should aim to include VMware-like capabilities to be competitive, especially considering cost factors.
For more quotes and insights, download the Red Hat OpenShift report
Immánuel Fodor - PeerSpot reviewerRakesh-Tomar - PeerSpot reviewer
RT
Mikhael Ibrahim - PeerSpot reviewerPratul Shukla - PeerSpot reviewer
SA
 

Setup Cost

Google Kubernetes Engine uses pay-as-you-go pricing, competitive with AWS, considering machine specs, compute resources, and optional GPUs.
Red Hat OpenShift pricing is high but potentially cost-effective for large enterprises, offering comprehensive support and enterprise capabilities.
Instead, we only pay for the hardware we use, which results in cost-cutting.
Google is considered cheaper compared to AWS, making it suitable for smaller to medium companies concerning cost.
The on-demand nodes are quite expensive.
For more quotes and insights, download the Google Kubernetes Engine report
Initially, licensing was per CPU, with a memory cap, but the price has doubled, making it difficult to justify for clients with smaller compute needs.
Red Hat can improve on the pricing part by making it more flexible and possibly on the lower side.
The cost of OpenShift is very high, particularly with the OpenShift Plus package, which includes many products and services.
For more quotes and insights, download the Red Hat OpenShift report
Parthasarathy T - PeerSpot reviewerImmánuel Fodor - PeerSpot reviewer
RT
AJ
UM
Mikhael Ibrahim - PeerSpot reviewer
 

Valuable Features

Google Kubernetes Engine offers seamless autoscaling, multi-cloud support, robust security, and easy cluster management for enhanced performance and reliability.
Red Hat OpenShift is valued for its security, scalability, automation, multi-cloud flexibility, and efficient management interface.
The most valuable aspect of Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) is its managed nature, which significantly reduces the burden on our platform team.
GKE is easier to understand and use than Elastic Kubernetes Service.
What I find most valuable is the ability to focus solely on my product without worrying about the Kubernetes infrastructure itself.
For more quotes and insights, download the Google Kubernetes Engine report
Because it was centrally managed in our company, many metrics that we had to write code for were available out of the box, including utilization, CPU utilization, memory, and similar metrics.
The concept of containers and scaling on demand is a feature I appreciate the most about Red Hat OpenShift.
A valuable feature of Red Hat OpenShift is its ability to handle increased loads by automatically adding nodes.
For more quotes and insights, download the Red Hat OpenShift report
Immánuel Fodor - PeerSpot reviewerRakesh-Tomar - PeerSpot reviewer
RT
Pratul Shukla - PeerSpot reviewer
UM
SA
 

Categories and Ranking

Google Kubernetes Engine
Ranking in Container Management
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in Container Management
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
PaaS Clouds (3rd), Server Virtualization Software (10th), Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms (6th), Agile and DevOps Services (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Container Management category, the mindshare of Google Kubernetes Engine is 2.3%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat OpenShift is 2.4%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Management
 

Featured Reviews

Parthasarathy T - PeerSpot reviewer
Managed solutions enable efficient handling of web applications and migration projects
Google Kubernetes Engine can be improved by enabling the in-place upgrade of the machine type of an existing node pool since I currently need to destroy and recreate it. There is no feature present where I can upgrade directly, and having more than 1,000 to 2,000 workloads in one node pool makes changing the node pool name difficult for all those workloads. I choose eight out of ten mainly because of the node pool upgrade challenge I mentioned, but also because of the existence of Anthos service mesh, which is the ingress controller available only for the enterprise Kubernetes Engine. It would be beneficial if it could be offered in the normal Kubernetes Engine with any limitations.
Read full review
Pratul Shukla - PeerSpot reviewer
Adopting a flexible and efficient approach with noticeable improvements in operational costs and continued challenges in job management
Currently, one of the biggest challenges we face is with services and jobs. For spawning batches, although it has crons, it is not easy to integrate with enterprise systems such as Autosys. The entire company uses Autosys, but we are not able to integrate it effectively. We need intermediate servers to run OC utility commands and initiate the cron job. We have to do a lot of modifications to ensure our batches work properly. With physical or virtual servers, even in AWS, we are able to write and manage multiple jobs. Managing batches in Red Hat OpenShift has been a significant challenge. Integrating third parties is a challenge with Red Hat OpenShift. For example, with Elasticsearch, onboarding itself was difficult, running file beats and dealing with routing issues. It is not straightforward, especially since we have some components in AWS as. AWS has many capabilities that come out of the box and are easier to work with compared to Red Hat OpenShift. Red Hat OpenShift's biggest disadvantage is they do not provide any private cloud setup where we can host on our site using their services. The main reason we went with Red Hat OpenShift was because it is a private cloud, and we have regulatory requirements that prevent us from using public cloud.
Read full review
report
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
865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
10%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
29%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Google Kubernetes Engine?
The product has no downtime.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google Kubernetes Engine?
Google Kubernetes Engine solution is expensive, as are all cloud solutions in general. On a scale of one to ten for pricing, I would rate it between seven and eight.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Google Kubernetes Engine?
I have no comment about the learning curve of Google Kubernetes Engine. Regarding AI integration and features in Google Kubernetes Engine, there are currently none available. I would appreciate see...
See all answers
How does OpenShift compare with Amazon AWS?
Open Shift makes managing infrastructure easy because of self-healing and automatic scaling. There is also a wonderful dashboard mechanism to alert us in case the application is over-committing or ...
See all answers
Which would you recommend - Pivotal Cloud Foundry or OpenShift?
Pivotal Cloud Foundry is a cloud-native application platform to simplify app delivery. It is efficient and effective. The best feature is how easy it is to handle external services such as database...
See all answers
What do you like most about OpenShift?
OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins.
See all answers
 

Comparisons

Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform vs Google Kubernetes Engine Logo
Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform vs Google Kubernetes Engine
Compared 24% of the time
Akamai Connected Cloud (Linode) vs Google Kubernetes Engine Logo
Akamai Connected Cloud (Linode) vs Google Kubernetes Engine
Compared 17% of the time
VMware Tanzu Platform vs Google Kubernetes Engine Logo
VMware Tanzu Platform vs Google Kubernetes Engine
Compared 13% of the time
Docker vs Google Kubernetes Engine Logo
Docker vs Google Kubernetes Engine
Compared 13% of the time
Rancher Labs vs Google Kubernetes Engine Logo
Rancher Labs vs Google Kubernetes Engine
Compared 11% of the time
More Google Kubernetes Engine Competitors
Pivotal Cloud Foundry vs Red Hat OpenShift Logo
Pivotal Cloud Foundry vs Red Hat OpenShift
Compared 14% of the time
Microsoft Azure vs Red Hat OpenShift Logo
Microsoft Azure vs Red Hat OpenShift
Compared 12% of the time
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs Red Hat OpenShift Logo
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs Red Hat OpenShift
Compared 11% of the time
Amazon AWS vs Red Hat OpenShift Logo
Amazon AWS vs Red Hat OpenShift
Compared 8% of the time
Google Cloud vs Red Hat OpenShift Logo
Google Cloud vs Red Hat OpenShift
Compared 5% of the time
More Red Hat OpenShift Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Google Kubernetes Engine
August 2025
Google Kubernetes Engine reportDownload Google Kubernetes Engine product report
Buyer's Guide
Red Hat OpenShift
August 2025
Red Hat OpenShift reportDownload Red Hat OpenShift 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

Red Hat OpenShift offers a robust, scalable platform with strong security and automation, suitable for container orchestration, application deployment, and microservices architecture.

Designed to modernize applications by transitioning from legacy systems to cloud-native environments, Red Hat OpenShift provides powerful CI/CD integration and Kubernetes compatibility. Its security features, multi-cloud support, and source-to-image functionality enhance deployment flexibility. While the GUI offers user-friendly navigation, users benefit from its cloud-agnostic nature and efficient lifecycle management. However, improvements are needed in documentation, configuration complexity, and integration with third-party platforms. Pricing and high resource demands can also be challenging for wider adoption.

What are the key features of Red Hat OpenShift?
  • Security: Comprehensive security features ensure safe deployments and operations.
  • Scalability: Auto-scaling and monitoring capabilities cater to high-demand environments.
  • CI/CD Integration: Seamless integration for efficient continuous deployment processes.
  • Cloud Compatibility: Supports multi-cloud and on-premise solutions with ease.
  • GUI: Simplifies platform management and enhances usability.
What benefits and ROI should users look for?
  • Improved Efficiency: Streamlined operations reduce time and resource investments.
  • Enhanced Flexibility: Adapt quickly to changing demands and environments.
  • Quick Deployment: Fast application deployment supports agile project timelines.
  • Robust Support: Access to dependable customer support services.

Red Hat OpenShift is strategically implemented for diverse industries focusing on container orchestration and application modernization. Organizations leverage it for migrating applications to cloud-native environments and managing CI/CD pipelines. Its functionality facilitates efficient resource management and microservices architecture adoption, supporting enterprise-level DevOps practices. Users employ it across cloud and on-premises platforms to drive performance improvements.

Red Hat
 

Sample Customers

Philips Lighting, Alpha Vertex, GroupBy, BQ
UPS, Cathay Pacific, Hilton
Buyer's Guide
Google Kubernetes Engine vs. Red Hat OpenShift
July 2025
Free Report: Google Kubernetes Engine vs. Red Hat OpenShift
Find out what your peers are saying about Google Kubernetes Engine vs. Red Hat OpenShift and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our Google Kubernetes Engine vs. Red Hat OpenShift report.
See our list of best Container Management vendors.

We monitor all Container Management 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.