Amazon S3 Glacier vs. Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Amazon S3 Glacier
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
The Amazon S3 Glacier storage classes are purpose-built for data archiving, providing a low cost archive storage in the cloud. According to AWS, S3 Glacier storage classes provide virtually unlimited scalability and are designed for 99.999999999% (11 nines) of data durability, and they provide fast access to archive data and low cost.
$0
Per GB Per Month
Amazon S3
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Amazon S3 is a cloud-based object storage service from Amazon Web Services. It's key features are storage management and monitoring, access management and security, data querying, and data transfer.N/A
Pricing
Amazon S3 GlacierAmazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Editions & Modules
Bulk Retrieval Pricing
$0.0025
Per GB Per Month
Storage Pricing
$0.004
Per GB Per Month
Retrieval Pricing
$0.01
Per GB Per Month
Expedited Retrieval Pricing
$0.03
Per GB Per Month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon S3 GlacierAmazon S3
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon S3 GlacierAmazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Considered Both Products
Amazon S3 Glacier
Chose Amazon S3 Glacier
We only compared the costs but as most of our machines and services are AWS centric and final call was with client so they decided to go with AWS Glacier only.
Chose Amazon S3 Glacier
Amazon Glacier isn't a direct competitor to the products I've listed; it could compare to the clouds/data warehouses each of these products use to store their data. In the case of CloudBerry, Amazon Glacier is used with it to create a complete archival backup system. That …
Chose Amazon S3 Glacier
Glacier is convenient with systems already on AWS and cheaper than S3 for data that needs to be accessed infrequently. A great tool for any team to use that has a legacy system or data.
Chose Amazon S3 Glacier
Since the rest of our infrastructure is in Amazon AWS, coding for sending data to Glacier just makes sense. The others are great as well, for their specific needs and uses, but having *another* third-party software to manage, be billed for, and learn/utilize can be costly in …
Chose Amazon S3 Glacier
The other alternatives for us would involve moving objects out of S3 to some other object storage services, which would generate a lot of network traffic, or keep the objects on more expensive storage.
Chose Amazon S3 Glacier
It is significantly cheaper than other services, however, it is because it actually is a slightly different service. The other services we've tried allow live reading/writing of data as needed, whereas Glacier is a "cold storage" service. So essentially your choice ends up …
Amazon S3
Chose Amazon S3
S3 is excellent but has a different use case than ebs. As ebs can be used as a filesystem, s3 bucket stores objects
Chose Amazon S3
Due to the best integration between other AWS services my company already used, S3 was the logic choice.
Chose Amazon S3
We opted for Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) solution as most of our workloads run on AWS and this saves as bandwidth costs. Otherwise the solutions are similar in capabilities for our needs.
Chose Amazon S3
Amazon S3 integrates way better with other AWS services and tools, making it the quick choice for your AWS based application. Furthermore, the pricing for Amazon S3 is very competitive and it has all the security and access capabilities to enable your application.
Google …
Chose Amazon S3
Pricing and Cost Structure are best:Amazon S3:Offers multiple storage classes: Standard, Intelligent-Tiering, Standard-IA (Infrequent Access), One Zone-IA, Glacier, and Glacier Deep Archive while other were costly and figuring out the monthly costs were difficult. The …
Chose Amazon S3
Amazon S3 has so much other functionality than it's competitors with so many more use cases. We use One Drive, Drop Box, Teams, Google Drive and other products for basic file sharing while working with partners and clients but that's kind of the extent of those products. S3 …
Chose Amazon S3
More robust and feature rich. Also more cost effective. However, the other options do lend themselves to be better at user friendliness. But if your technological and willing to look up help in the support knowledgebase you will do just fine and get a better product at …
Chose Amazon S3
When we were implementation the solution of our issue then we find Azure and Google Cloud Storage platforms but we were unable to find the proper documentation for the platform as compared to S3, So we moved to S3 and discarded the other options. Cost wise there are only some …
Chose Amazon S3
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is the only AWS offering for object storage. DynamoDB is fantastic for unstructured data but does not handle object storage. The relational database service (RDS) is excellent but only applies to use cases with structured table data, and does …
Chose Amazon S3
Linode and Google Cloud Storage
Chose Amazon S3
All other alternatives are also good but as our infrastructure was on AWS, Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) was a better choice due to its better integration with other AWS services. It was serving the purpose in an economical way. All of our needs were being fulfilled by …
Chose Amazon S3
Amazon S3 is the business driving arrangement by Amazon Web Services. It has answers for all startup's and huge venture. The expense viability is one reason that I have chosen the Amazon S3 over other
Chose Amazon S3
We are an AWS shop, thus it is much easier to use with other AWS services. It may not always be the cheapest but once you are in AWS if you can decouple your apps and use this as one of your services it will certainly make developer's life easier and admin life easier.
Chose Amazon S3
S3 is the most mature simple storage service on the web. It has direct competitors from Google and Azure, as well as a bunch of other competitors that focus on different aspects. For example, Backblaze specializes on file backups, and while s3 can also be used for that, …
Chose Amazon S3
We had already decided to use Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) for other compute services, so it made sense to use Amazon for blob storage as well. By using the same cloud vendor, we can more easily integrate between AWS services like Cloudfront. Blob storage is essentially a …
Chose Amazon S3
Amazon S3 provides a variety of tools for uploading short and large objects to the cloud. AWS S3 is a key-value store, one of the major categories of NoSQL databases used for accumulating voluminous, mutating, unstructured, or semistructured data. S3 object retrieval is fast. …
Chose Amazon S3
They're both great. I really don't know the differences, but both have the same basic set of features, in my opinion. But, S3 is widely know as a greater tool, safer, and much easier. Also, it's used by and compatible with a lot of applications around the world. That made us …
Chose Amazon S3
I think [Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)] is cheaper than Azure Blob Storage (at least at the time I selected it). It is a low maintenance product and it is more reliable.
Chose Amazon S3
The main differences are that S3 files can be accessed publicly without having an account on the service so it is suitable for website assets, but the other services have desktop hard drive syncing applications so they are more suitable for sharing files to other staff in the …
Chose Amazon S3
Google Cloud Storage provides many of the same features as Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service), but they differ quite a bit in the database integrations they provide. The main reason we had to use Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is because our main infrastructure cloud …
Chose Amazon S3
AWS probably has the most difficult UI to learn but it's the far better service.
Google is probably second but it has storage limitations and there are some security concerns (still a good tool for collaboration)
The Microsoft products are the worst IMO. They're slow and have the …
Chose Amazon S3
Most of our customers are on AWS so it's easy for us to integrate it with AWS S3 and we could deliver our projects on or before the expected time.
Chose Amazon S3
Amazon S3 is more cost-effective then what Microsoft Azure offers.
Features
Amazon S3 GlacierAmazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Data Center Backup
Comparison of Data Center Backup features of Product A and Product B
Amazon S3 Glacier
-
Ratings
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
9.0
Ratings
8% above category average
Universal recovery00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Instant recovery00 Ratings7.90 Ratings
Recovery verification00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Business application protection00 Ratings8.60 Ratings
Multiple backup destinations00 Ratings9.40 Ratings
Incremental backup identification00 Ratings9.30 Ratings
Backup to the cloud00 Ratings9.40 Ratings
Deduplication and file compression00 Ratings8.70 Ratings
Snapshots00 Ratings9.50 Ratings
Flexible deployment00 Ratings9.20 Ratings
Management dashboard00 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Platform support00 Ratings8.70 Ratings
Retention options00 Ratings10.00 Ratings
Encryption00 Ratings9.80 Ratings
Enterprise Backup
Comparison of Enterprise Backup features of Product A and Product B
Amazon S3 Glacier
-
Ratings
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
8.8
Ratings
7% above category average
Continuous data protection00 Ratings9.40 Ratings
Replication00 Ratings9.20 Ratings
Operational reporting and analytics00 Ratings8.50 Ratings
Malware protection00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Multi-location capabilities00 Ratings9.50 Ratings
Ransomware Recovery00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Amazon S3 GlacierAmazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Small Businesses
Cove Data Protection
Cove Data Protection
Score 9.9 out of 10
Cove Data Protection
Cove Data Protection
Score 9.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Cove Data Protection
Cove Data Protection
Score 9.9 out of 10
Bacula Enterprise
Bacula Enterprise
Score 9.2 out of 10
Enterprises
Microsoft Exchange
Microsoft Exchange
Score 9.2 out of 10
Bacula Enterprise
Bacula Enterprise
Score 9.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Amazon S3 GlacierAmazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.2
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
6.0
(0 ratings)
7.6
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
9.8
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Amazon S3 GlacierAmazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Likelihood to Recommend
As described in the use case, it is perfect for backup data storage where you do not expect to retrieve the data often. Think of it as a data dump; it is nice to know you have a backup, but it actually is expensive and somewhat difficult to retrieve everything.
Read full review
For archiving old data that is infrequently accessed it is perfect. You can choose to let it go into cold/glacier storage which saves even further costs but at the expense of accessibility. I like that you can set access rules to automatically move it to the next storage tier after a certain amount of time that it has not been accessed. I also use it a lot with PHP via the API. We have some custom in-house applications that have a fair amount of data uploaded into them. S3 has been a perfect solution to store these files, taking the load off web servers and never having issues with running out of storage.
Read full review
Pros
  • Glacier is an inexpensive solution to the problem of storing rarely-accessed data for years.
  • You can configure S3 buckets to transition objects to Glacier with a few clicks.
  • It is easy to get started with Glacier; there is little learning curve and few concepts to familiarize yourself with.
Read full review
  • Reliable and secure way to store objects in cloud: Storing any type of file(text, pdf, doc, csv, etc) is very easy with S3. Fetching this stored content as and when you require is also pretty easy and can be done using both the console and AWS CLI. Appropriate permissions can be set up for buckets using IAM roles/policies.
  • Versioning in buckets: S3 gives you a very handy feature to store multiple versions of objects stored in a bucket.
  • Lifecycle policies: You can set up lifecycle policies in S3 that can move your older objects to IA or Glacier. This setup is very easy and can be done within minutes for a bucket.
  • Replication: The cross-region replication that S3 provides is wonderful. Beware of the inter-regional data transfer costs though.
Read full review
Cons
  • Billing system isn't the smoothest to operate
  • Recalling information from glacier can run slow depending on type of data
  • Customer support
Read full review
  • The biggest problem is to rename the bucket. There is no direct way to do it. One need to copy entire content to the different bucket with intended bucket name and then remove the old bucket. Sometimes it creates issues.
  • There is no direct way to upload .zip file and extract it to inside the bucket.
  • While uploading large files, sometimes you will find a drop of upload speed. I observe it so many times and while checking my internet speed, I find it absolutely perfect. So there must have something wrong on the AWS side.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
Due to princing, availability and scalability.
Read full review
Usability
It is difficult to delete the data as you have to wait for inventory and then bucket modification has to expire.
Read full review
The UI could have some improvements (better filters) and there is a lack of some useful functionality, such as renaming an existing bucket: the latter is much needed in the context of rapidly evolving companies. Overall though, Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is easy to use and to onboard people and tools to, thanks to its various APIs and flexibility.
Read full review
Support Rating
No answers on this topic
It depends on your tier within Amazon on how great of support you get. For us we have a dedicated Point of Contact that is great in taking in what we need and discussing it with the S3 team. The best thing is features we need or suggest have a good chance of landing on their roadmap.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Amazon Glacier isn't a direct competitor to the products I've listed; it could compare to the clouds/data warehouses each of these products use to store their data. In the case of CloudBerry, Amazon Glacier is used with it to create a complete archival backup system. That said, when using Amazon Glacier along with a product like CloudBerry, you can create a reliable, inexpensive cloud backup system for retaining HUGE quantities of data for much less than these other cloud backup solutions. HOWEVER, if you want to restore said data, the cost and complexity begin to become a major concern, so Amazon Glacier should only be considered in situations where you don't plan to touch the data regularly, if at all, once it's at Glacier.
Read full review
S3 is the most mature simple storage service on the web. It has direct competitors from Google and Azure, as well as a bunch of other competitors that focus on different aspects. For example, Backblaze specializes on file backups, and while s3 can also be used for that, Backblaze provides a better price point in exchange for more focused functionality. S3 really shines in that it performs simple things astonishingly well, while also being flexible enough to stretch itself to other situations (data lakes, file mounts, backup/restores systems, web hosting, etc.).
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • With this now we are storing data for less cost as compare to what we were paying earlier
  • Increased the data access limits
Read full review
  • Allows us to store large amounts of raw traffic from data providers to allow us to view data our systems received at particular times, in order to reconstruct inputs in case of errors
  • Is capable of storing very large amounts of data cheaply without material impact to our business
Read full review
ScreenShots