AWS Elastic Beanstalk vs. Google Cloud Run

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Score 7.4 out of 10
N/A
AWS Elastic Beanstalk is the platform-as-a-service offering provided by Amazon and designed to leverage AWS services such as Amazon Elastic Cloud Compute (Amazon EC2), Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3).
$0
Users pay for AWS resources (e.g. EC2, S3 buckets, etc.) used to store and run the application.
Google Cloud Run
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Google Cloud Run enables users to build and deploy scalable containerized apps written in any language (including Go, Python, Java, Node.js, .NET, and Ruby) on a fully managed platform. Cloud Run can be paired with other container ecosystem tools, including Google's Cloud Build, Cloud Code, Artifact Registry, and Docker. And it features out-of-the-box integration with Cloud Monitoring, Cloud Logging, Cloud Trace, and Error Reporting to ensure the health of an application.N/A
Pricing
AWS Elastic BeanstalkGoogle Cloud Run
Editions & Modules
No Charge
$0
Users pay for AWS resources (e.g. EC2, S3 buckets, etc.) used to store and run the application.
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
AWS Elastic BeanstalkGoogle Cloud Run
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
YesYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
AWS Elastic BeanstalkGoogle Cloud Run
Considered Both Products
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
There are many services like AWS Elastic beanstalk, but there are none with the maturity in the platform or the cost-effectiveness of AWS Elastic Beanstalk. Also, AWS Elastic Beanstalk is the oldest among them, so there are more people with AWS experience than the other …
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
I have used App Engine on Google Cloud Platform and App Service on Microsoft Azure. Both offer similar capabilities to AWS Elastic Beanstalk. App Engine has the nice ability to scale to 0 instances when the application has not been in use for some time. This allows for …
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
As it supports end to end flow of application deployment and not a part of any individual process like other AWS products, AWS Elastic Beanstalk can be a game changer in cloud industry.
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
The AWS platform provides a great deal of configurability that is abstracted and provided very well through AWS Elastic Beanstalk. This is the main reason for choosing Elastic Beanstalk over competing services. Another reason for selecting AWS Beanstalk was vendor …
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
I selected AWS Elastic Beanstalk mainly because we have been using AWS services for our company. Using AWS Elastic Beanstalk is relatively easier than starting to use a completely new cloud platform. But we are also reviewing Google App Engine, and found out Elastic Beanstalk …
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
AWS Elastic Beanstalk is equivalent to Google App Engine in terms of product. I selected AWS Elastic Beanstalk because it was within the stack we were using, and it made sense for us given the other architecture.
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
I use both EB and Lambda for different use cases. I normally use AWS Lambda for my smaller software needs.
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
We now default to Amazon ECS, due to flexibility this gives us with how workloads scale, and more network flexibility as many of our workloads are internal / external facing. We selected Elastic Beanstalk at beginning of our containerization phase, which suited our needs …
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Azure currently doesn't have a solution that's similar to this but you can do a lot of the features with several of the components that Microsoft Azure offers. AWS Elastic Beanstalk exists in that niche market where if you have an existing solution, this is a great way to move &…
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
We were already hosting on AWS so it just made sense to keep our infrastructure where we have it. And it all works pretty nicely.
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
AWS is much more focused on scalability, but Heroku was much easier to get things up and running as a beginner. For simple hosting, I would stick to something like Heroku or Netlify. That said, Elastic Beanstalk is meant for more performant functions requiring large scaling and …
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
AWS Elastic Beanstalk is a great option for an organization that's already invested in the AWS ecosystem. The greater the number of complementary features needed by the application (e.g. integrating with Amazon's Elastic Load Balancer, databases, etc), the greater the reward …
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
We also use Heroku and it is a great platform for smaller projects and light Node.js services, but we have found that in terms of cost, the Elastic Beanstalk option is more affordable for the projects that we undertake. The fact that it sits inside of the greater AWS Cloud …
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
We ended up with AWS Lambda to take workload off the developers and develop in tandem, then later integrate. We use both though.
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
I enjoyed that Lightsail was so simple to provision and access via the in-browser SSH terminal, but ultimately Elastic Beanstalk is a more robust offering that interfaces seamlessly with more of AWS's other services. Elastic Beanstalk is also better equipped to automate …
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
I selected these solutions because they are the closest to being able to set up separate server or VM instances. As far as performance and scalability, Heroku does offer an autoscale option, but the base cost to have the autoscale in place, sets Heroku behind EBS. Digital …
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
We didn't use Lambda much till now. We, however, found better control of resources in EBS.
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Honestly, I haven't tried any other alternative products. As already mentioned, I am already heavily invested in AWS, so EBS was a natural choice for me. In other reviews, I have found, AWS is better than its competitors. There are more flavors, and options in AWS, better …
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Heroku is another similar product which we had tried out to deploy one of the NodeJs project and it has lot of developer friendly features as well. Though Heroku is more expensive than Beanstalk is what I found. Heroku also has some restrictions which can affect the …
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
The other main competitor that I have used would probably be Heroku. While Heroku is incredibly simple and easy to get a sample web app online, its dashboard and product connectivity didn't feel quite as seamless as AWS Elastic Beanstalk. AWS Elastic Beanstalk has a higher up …
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
In some of the other companies that I've worked in, I've had the opportunity to work with the above softwares where the structure and architecture of the services was much complicated but the above softwares were able to handle it with more ease and efficiency. The complex …
Google Cloud Run
Chose Google Cloud Run
Most of our existing serverless services are deployed on Google to it was a natural choice. With the new artifact registry, its very easy to deploy. With git flows, its now even easier to update the deployment just with a commit to the main branch. The initial trial period is …
Chose Google Cloud Run
The other two obvious cloud providers have direct alternatives: AWS Lambda and Azure Functions. Both were also evaluated briefly (only to validate that they exist); however, the organization had settled on shifting to Google for business reasons, and therefore, the comparison …
Chose Google Cloud Run
Google Cloud Run is integrated into GCP resources, admin, and billing. But it is not as easy to use as some other platforms like Heroku.
Chose Google Cloud Run
Flexibility of features snd customzing options tha optimized the large process and make it on the the go to reuse the same process in multiple deployments ot rollouts
Chose Google Cloud Run
Cloud Run is just so much easier and straightforward to work with than EC2 when it comes to getting a Docker image up and running and serving requests.
Chose Google Cloud Run
Clear separation between container and execution layer.
Chose Google Cloud Run
Usage is easy and also we have GCP as out cloud partner hence we made up our mind to go with Cloud Run and so far no issues things are going fine with it. and getting good features from Google in it.
Chose Google Cloud Run
DigitalOcean auto scale droplets is still in early stages and is not on par with Google Cloud Run.

It is easy to develop and test Google Cloud Run applications compared to other available alternatives.
Chose Google Cloud Run
For us, Google Cloud Run is a complement to Google Tag Manager to enable server-side data collection.
Chose Google Cloud Run
AWS Lambda supports code zip package, enabling lower cold start time. Also, AWS Lambda pricing is much simpler, easier to understand.

Chose Google Cloud Run
The Goolge docs for their products as well as the UI is a lot nicer than AWS or Azure and in general I found it much easy to work with. We selected Google mainly because of startup credits and the support offered but can confidently say we would choose them again without that …
Features
AWS Elastic BeanstalkGoogle Cloud Run
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
8.0
Ratings
0% above category average
Google Cloud Run
-
Ratings
Ease of building user interfaces8.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability7.20 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform management overhead8.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Workflow engine capability7.20 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform access control8.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Services-enabled integration8.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment creation7.20 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment replication8.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue monitoring and notification8.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue recovery9.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Upgrades and platform fixes8.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Container Management
Comparison of Container Management features of Product A and Product B
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
-
Ratings
Google Cloud Run
7.3
Ratings
6% below category average
Security and Isolation00 Ratings8.60 Ratings
Container Orchestration00 Ratings8.40 Ratings
Cluster Management00 Ratings6.40 Ratings
Storage Management00 Ratings2.70 Ratings
Resource Allocation and Optimization00 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Discovery Tools00 Ratings7.60 Ratings
Update Rollouts and Rollbacks00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Self-Healing and Recovery00 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Analytics, Monitoring, and Logging00 Ratings7.50 Ratings
Best Alternatives
AWS Elastic BeanstalkGoogle Cloud Run
Small Businesses
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.7 out of 10
Portainer
Portainer
Score 9.6 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
AWS Elastic BeanstalkGoogle Cloud Run
Likelihood to Recommend
7.2
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
7.9
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
7.0
(0 ratings)
6.4
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
7.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
AWS Elastic BeanstalkGoogle Cloud Run
Likelihood to Recommend
AWS Elastic Beanstalk is well suited for [the] rapid development of applications that use standard compute platforms based on popular programming languages. So getting a Go, Python, Ruby, or Node.js app going in AWS Elastic Beanstalk will be easy. For non-standard applications, containers provide another option for using AWS Elastic Beanstalk. In either case, AWS Elastic Beanstalk is well suited for applications that are [self-contained]. AWS Elastic Beanstalk is also good for development or test environments that need a built-in deployment method. AWS Elastic Beanstalk is less appropriate for complex applications that rely on multiple AWS services. While deploying and running the base code might be easy to get going, it may be difficult to apply permissions and integrations with the other services.
Read full review
Microservices and RestFul API application as it is fast and reliant. Seamless integration with event triggers such as pubsub or event arc, so you can easily integrate that with usecases with file uploads, database changes, etc. Basically great with short-lived tasks, if however, you have long-running processses, Cloud Run might not be idle for this. For example if you have a long running data processing task, other solutions such as kubeflow pipelines or dataflow are more suited for this kind of tasks. Cloud Run is also stateless, so if you need memory, you will have to connect an external database.
Read full review
Pros
  • Extremely easy to get set up and get apps deployed.
  • Integrates really well with existing build processes and is manageable through a suite of CLI tools.
  • It is very easy to scale up.
  • The documentation is exceptionally detailed and covers a very wide range of deployment scenarios.
Read full review
  • Real-time autoscaling. Escalamento automático em tempo real
  • Simplified Continuous Deployment. Implantação contínua simplificada
  • Running tasks in the background. Execução de tarefas em segundo plano
Read full review
Cons
  • How to more easily integrate with other other AWS services. There are plenty out there, but it's not quite as seamless as I feel like it should be to mix and match products.
  • Make backing up easier when scaling the server. It took quite a bit of time to make sure we had everything set up in case something went wrong.
  • When you are first starting to use AWS, the dashboard can be very intimidating. There are countless products all with names that aren't very indicative of what they actually do.
Read full review
  • Cloud Run doesn't allow you to redeploy an already existing revision which can be inconvenient in some use cases
  • Tricky to get the deployment working to start but once it's working that's great
  • The actual deployment is not the fastest but it's not too bad
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
As our technology grows, it makes more sense to individually provision each server rather than have it done via beanstalk. There are several reasons to do so, which I cannot explain without further diving into the architecture itself, but I can tell you this. With automation, you also loose the flexibility to morph the system for your specific needs. So if you expect that in future you need more customization to your deployment process, then there is a good chance that you might try to do things individually rather than use an automation like beanstalk.
Read full review
We definitely need to renew it because we dont own our own infrastructure and storage and we are happy with Cloud Run features
Read full review
Usability
The overall usability is good enough, as far as the scaling, interactive UI and logging system is concerned, could do a lot better when it comes to the efficiency, in case of complicated node logics and complicated node architectures. It can have better software compatibility and can try to support collaboration with more softwares
Read full review
The UI/console is great... the documentation is top-notch for developers, but the CLI itself when you have to script around it is very complex and easy to forget some options... the downside of a generic command line client.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
No answers on this topic
Not seen any major issues when we run applications its good
Read full review
Performance
No answers on this topic
Initially we felt slow but slowly it picked up and easy to manage
Read full review
Support Rating
As I described earlier it has been really cost effective and really easy for fellow developers who don't want to waste weeks and weeks into learning and manually deploying stuff which basically takes month to create and go live with the Minimal viable product (MVP). With AWS Beanstalk within a week a developer can go live with the Minimal viable product easily.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
- Do as many experiments as you can before you commit on using beanstalk or other AWS features. - Keep future state in mind. Think through what comes next, and if that is technically possible to do so. - Always factor in cost in terms of scaling. - We learned a valuable lesson when we wanted to go multi-region, because then we realized many things needs to change in code. So if you plan on using this a lot, factor multiple regions.
Read full review
I was involved in the initial implementation setup, Its easy with the given documentaiton we can do ourself. Not that critical
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
There are many services like AWS Elastic beanstalk, but there are none with the maturity in the platform or the cost-effectiveness of AWS Elastic Beanstalk. Also, AWS Elastic Beanstalk is the oldest among them, so there are more people with AWS experience than the other platforms. The only thing is their documentation and UX are a bit old, which doesn't stop it from performing greatly, but yes, if you are looking for better UX, then you can check out other options.
Read full review
AWS Lambda supports code zip package, enabling lower cold start time. Also, AWS Lambda pricing is much simpler, easier to understand.
Other than that, the 2 products are very similar, including the Docker image support: the image must be built based on proprietary base image.
Obviously, if your other services are running in GCP, then Google Cloud Run is your only choice for tight integration, & private networking.
Read full review
Scalability
No answers on this topic
It has good auto scale feature and reliable also
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Elastic Beanstalk removes countless hours from development team responsibility, freeing up those resources to instead focus on building the products that our customers want to use.
  • As a business that is already embedded into using EC2 instances, it's essentially free to leverage the work that AWS performs on configuring the Elastic Beanstalk stacks.
  • With Elastic Beanstalk, while there is still a responsibility to ensure that applications can work with updated underlying dependencies, it's much easier when AWS handled the heavy lifting of updating the stacks.
Read full review
  • It has saved us some costs since we now do not require a live server and have moved to a serverless workflow for these services
  • Breaking changes do not affect the entire application now that we have separated our concerns using a serverless service
  • Much easier to debug since we can now isolate our services and reduce the search space for finding/fixing bugs
Read full review
ScreenShots