Google Cloud SQL vs. Microsoft Access

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Google Cloud SQL
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
Google Cloud SQL is a database-as-a-service (DBaaS) with the capability and functionality of MySQL.
$0
per core hour
Microsoft Access
Score 7.6 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft Access is a database management system from Microsoft that combines the relational Microsoft Jet Database Engine with a graphical user interface and software-development tools.
$139.99
per PC
Pricing
Google Cloud SQLMicrosoft Access
Editions & Modules
License - Express
$0
per core hour
License - Web
$0.01134
per core hour
Storage - for backups
$.08
per month per GB
HA Storage - for backups
$.08
per month per GB
Storage - HDD storage capacity
$.09
per month per GB
License - Standard
$0.13
per core hour
Storage - SSD storage capacity
$.17
per month per GB
HA Storage - HDD storage capacity
$.18
per month per GB
HA Storage - SSD storage capacity
$.34
per month per GB
License - Enterprise
$0.47
per core hour
Memory
$5.11
per month per GB
HA Memory
$10.22
per month per GB
vCPUs
$30.15
per month per vCPU
HA vCPUs
$60.30
per month per vCPU
Microsoft Access
$139.99
per PC
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Google Cloud SQLMicrosoft Access
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsPricing varies with editions, engine, and settings, including how much storage, memory, and CPU you provision. Cloud SQL offers per-second billing.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Google Cloud SQLMicrosoft Access
Considered Both Products
Google Cloud SQL
Chose Google Cloud SQL
Google Cloud SQL ended up being less expensive, have a greater support team and offer a much better interface
Chose Google Cloud SQL
I 100% prefer Google Cloud SQL over Amazon Aurora in terms of ease of use and clarity in terms of understanding how the autoscaling is going to work. Connecting to the database directly is also much more straightforward.
Chose Google Cloud SQL
Setting up or migrating Google Cloud SQL is easy as compared to AWS. It has a good monitoring and logging mechanism and a good user interface which makes it easy to navigate.It also has a pay as you go pricing which makes it easier to reduce cost. Google Cloud SQL offers …
Chose Google Cloud SQL
Actually Google Cloud SQL is similar to them, the difference is which engine each supports e.g. there's no managed Oracle DB in Google Cloud SQL but as long as you don't need Oracle, Google Cloud SQL should suffice and give you great user experience and performance. You also …
Chose Google Cloud SQL
Google SQL was great as a first SQL provision. It quickly enabled the apps to be built and scaled as needed for a while. It was robust and adaptable as needed and easy to export as needed when ready, depending on growth. Cost-wise, it's a good choice and requires little …
Chose Google Cloud SQL
Unlike other products, Google Cloud SQL has very flexible features that allow it to be selected for a free trial account so that the product can be analyzed and tested before purchasing it. Integration capabilities with most of the web services tools are easier regarding Google …
Chose Google Cloud SQL
When comparing cost, Google Cloud SQL typically offers a more straightforward and versatile plan than Azure SQL Database. Cloud SQL for PostgreSQL is a serverless solution provided by Google Cloud SQL that automatically modifies resources according to workload. For customers …
Chose Google Cloud SQL
- AWS RDS and Aurora is a just a notch above Google Cloud SQL as it provide boost in performance when required
- Google Cloud SQL Mysql Engine is Cloud based and better than native Mysql as it provides management of the server out of box
- Compared to a MongoDB it has a low …
Chose Google Cloud SQL
At first, we choose Google Cloud SQL only for demo purposes. It is so easy to set up and It is fully managed. we have worked with Azure SQL as well but Google SQL is more simple to use and It fully secure, reliable, provides high availability, and very Low Latency.
Chose Google Cloud SQL
Easier learning, simple features and settings with a very user-friendly application environment and flexible prices make Google Cloud [SQL] a pioneering option over competitors
Chose Google Cloud SQL
Google Cloud SQL is just as good as the other guys. We were already invested in GCP, which made the choice very easy. We did not want to start fresh in AWS or Azure. We used our existing GCP setup and just added Cloud SQL. It's unfortunate that companies continue to send people …
Chose Google Cloud SQL
There are many options for cloud-hosted dedicated SQL instances. In many ways, simply moving from software and server-based database to a dedicated cloud database is just generally good. All hosts provide some sort of scaling and backup, and all separate the server management …
Chose Google Cloud SQL
We use the MySQL managed database that Cloud SQL offers, and it has all of the functionality of on-prem MySQL, plus it is managed.
Chose Google Cloud SQL
Google Cloud SQL is very similar to other cloud provider options. AWS and DigitalOcean are direct competitors, While Azure is focusing on their own products. At cloud provider level, it's a matter of choosing the provider, and this product will not play a significant role on …
Chose Google Cloud SQL
The Google Cloud SQL offering fits into our development stack and was a clean replacement for our MySQL database. If we had been using SQL Server instead, then the offering from Azure would have made more sense. I have used both in the past and both work well, with GCP being …
Chose Google Cloud SQL
It's dramatically faster than running MySQL on a VM, which is what we did before. Whatever Google has done to optimize Google Cloud SQL compared to standalone MySQL installations has worked.
Chose Google Cloud SQL
DigitalOcean managed database is relatively less costly compared to Google Cloud SQL database.

Google Cloud SQL service is well integrated with other Google Cloud Platform services such as IAM which enables fine grain access to team members.
Chose Google Cloud SQL
Simple to implement as SaaS.
Chose Google Cloud SQL
I've used supabase and can say that Google Cloud SQL is a lot more hands off. They just run an instance for you and don't do much more than that. Which is exactly what we wanted. If you want something that is truly fully managed and abstracted then I guess that would be a …
Chose Google Cloud SQL
Kind of similar features provided against RDS. Used this because of transactional db
Chose Google Cloud SQL
Google's solution for database is, at least for our team, easier to implement and maintain than Amazon's offer.
Microsoft Access
Chose Microsoft Access
Microsoft Access is a superb software in database management system. I have been using it for many years without any hesitations. The software is making it different from other software with its awesome features. The software is cost effective for the organisation. It also …
Chose Microsoft Access
Excel is a fantastic - robust application that can do so much so easily. Its easy to train and understand. However - excel does not provide a reporting function and that is typically where we will suggest a move to [Microsoft] Access. [Microsoft] Access requires a little more …
Chose Microsoft Access

With [Microsoft] Access I am able to quickly create simple database driven solutions with built in UI and reporting in one tool. Advanced coding is not necessary and the tool guides you through building out. Opponents for a robust, end-to/end product.

Chose Microsoft Access
Having used Snowflake, I can definitely say that both of these tools are very easy to use and value for money. Although for me, the aspects where Microsoft Access stacks up are its low cost and usability. Snowflake is good with its cloud-based system but for startups where the …
Chose Microsoft Access
I haven't really used another database product other than Microsoft Access since the mid-90s. I don't even remember which program I did use, but needless to say, it did not have as much functionality nor was it as user friendly as databases today. So I really can't say how …
Chose Microsoft Access
Crystal is easier for report writing, but isn't a database solution. Salesforce is lovely, but much more expensive than an old copy of Microsoft Office. For a small budget, [Microsoft] Access was really the only viable option. I only wish it was easier to write complex reports.
Chose Microsoft Access
[Selected Microsoft Access for] employee learning simplicity, attractive graphical environment and features of Microsoft 365 with responsive Microsoft support.
Chose Microsoft Access
Visual FoxPro is a discontinued software, and no longer has support. Also, very few people still use it, or ever know how to use it. Excel is very popular, but [Microsoft] Access can do things like data joins much easier and faster
Chose Microsoft Access
Although SQL is a full-blown platform for heavy database management, Microsoft Access serves the purpose perfectly for small and mid-scale enterprises. It is also perfect for people just getting started with database management. The graphical user interface is a major plus …
Chose Microsoft Access
Microsoft Access is better for large files and backlogs than Excel because it can handle the workload. Excel is great as well, but filtering and searching is limited, and it can crash rather easily. You don't see those problems with Access.
Chose Microsoft Access
We've actually started to use both of these programs. There are pros and cons to both.
Microsoft Access is best for linking two sets of data that already have a common shared field (i.e. both sets of data include a student ID number, social security number, etc)
Airtable is best …
Chose Microsoft Access
  • Microsoft Access is great for local low code, relational database applications where users are creating, reading, updating, and deleting data (CRUD)..
  • Useful mostly for locally stored database and not network or cloud-based applications
  • Easy-to-user interface makes it hard to …
Chose Microsoft Access
SharePoint is good for simple data structures, use of workflow, integration with AD, etc. But SharePoint does not support fully relational data or complex reporting, whereas Access absolutely does.
Chose Microsoft Access
Being a similar "Windows application" it's easier to start to use as part of Office. Also, the GUI capabilities are much more advanced than other high-performance databases.
Chose Microsoft Access
Tableau is not even a 'switch-out' tool, it's for visualization so it's not a fair comparison. Against other databasing tools, MySQL is still my favorite may be simply due to being a creature of comfort because that's where I first learned to manage DB. However, Microsoft …
Chose Microsoft Access
MS SQL is a more powerful tool but I love the reporting feature in MS Access. MS Excel is useful for complex calculations but to me, MS Access helps me organize that data. InfoPath is similar to MS Access in that you can create forms for data entry, but it does not include …
Chose Microsoft Access
Microsoft Access is a bit dated compared to other database tools. It is slower, not able to handle quantities of data that are as large as the other tools, and a bit more finicky. However, it is sometimes the preferred tool for some clients. It also has a lower barrier to entry …
Chose Microsoft Access
Filemaker Pro focuses more on data collection in a single, flat file while Access allows for relationships to be drawn between data tables the reduces duplication. I have not worked with FileMaker Pro for several years but found it to be very unwieldy for my needs which were …
Chose Microsoft Access
We tried Salesforce, which was expensive and not as customizable as Access. QuickBase also was pricey compared to already having an MS license with the existing package, and QuickBase was not very intuitive. The other option was an open source version which was less intuitive …
Chose Microsoft Access
Microsoft Access is much easier to understand and use than SAP. There are a lot of menus in SAP which can be very difficult to navigate. If you are familiar with Microsoft Word/Excel it is very similar and should be easy to learn. Also maintaining databases in Access is much …
Chose Microsoft Access
Microsoft Access databases are more suitable for us because we are a smaller team. It's easy for us to export the reporting. It's also easy for people to create their own databases as well! Microsoft Access is honestly a one-stop-shop for us, and we figured we were not at a …
Features
Google Cloud SQLMicrosoft Access
Database-as-a-Service
Comparison of Database-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
Google Cloud SQL
9.3
Ratings
7% above category average
Microsoft Access
-
Ratings
Automatic software patching9.60 Ratings00 Ratings
Database scalability9.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Automated backups9.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Database security provisions9.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Monitoring and metrics8.20 Ratings00 Ratings
Automatic host deployment9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Google Cloud SQLMicrosoft Access
Small Businesses
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
InterSystems IRIS
InterSystems IRIS
Score 7.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
InterSystems IRIS
InterSystems IRIS
Score 7.7 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
SAP IQ
SAP IQ
Score 10.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Google Cloud SQLMicrosoft Access
Likelihood to Recommend
9.5
(0 ratings)
5.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
6.4
(0 ratings)
6.4
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
6.5
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
5.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Google Cloud SQLMicrosoft Access
Likelihood to Recommend
Does what it promises well, for instance, as a sidecar for the main enterprise data warehouse. However, I would not recommend using it as the main data warehouse, particularly due to the heavy business logic, as other dedicated tools are more suitable for ensuring scalable operations in terms of change management and multi-developer adjustments.
Read full review
Having worked at startups, I can say Microsoft Access is most suited for their needs. Some of the reasons for that can be the ease and ability to create tables, design an entity-relationship diagram, define the relationship between different tables, feeding data into the tables, and retrieving data. All of this can be curated very easily into a process for small to medium-size enterprises. But a serious limitation can be observed where Access does not provide better features for large-scale companies. Another limitation is for companies where Mac is used as work computers.
Read full review
Pros
  • Very easy to use and migrate existing database systems to Google Cloud SQL system
  • Easy to query with real-time query assessment as well as processing metrics to help optimize the queries
  • No need to learn any other querying language (like in Hadoop ecosystem), as SQL works pretty fine
  • Easy-to-use GCP portal to type in queries and see the results on the screen (no need to go on command line )
  • Easy to set up
Read full review
  • One good aspect of Microsoft Access is how the software can be customized for different applications. This is very useful because we are able to use this software for multiple applications, which makes it cost-friendly.
  • Another strong point of Microsoft Access is the skill required to customize, the amount of programming required is less than most other database programs. This is good for a beginner looking to get into database management.
  • Microsoft Access is one of the more cost-friendly database applications, and most of the time it comes with Microsoft Office. Other database programs can be expensive and not as easy to use.
Read full review
Cons
  • Increasing support for more database engines may enable a wider range of application needs to be met.
  • Implementing and updating cutting-edge security features on a constant basis.
  • Streamlining and enhancing the tools for transferring data to Google Cloud SQL from on-premises databases or other cloud providers.
Read full review
  • Generally high learning curve for new users. Especially if they are not comfortable with technology.
  • Desktop only program; not available in web-format like other O365 products
  • Fewer experienced users, means it's a lot of self-teaching and troubleshooting when you run into an issue
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
It fits the current needs and bandwith of out lean organization.
Read full review
I and the rest of my team will renew our Microsoft Access in the future because we use and maintain many different applications and databases created using Microsoft Access so we will need to maintain them in the future. Additionally, it is a standard at our place of work so it is at $0 cost to us to use. Another reason for renewing Microsoft Access is that we just don' t have the resources needed to extend into a network of users so we need to remain a single-desktop application at this time.
Read full review
Usability
As with other cloud tools, users must learn a new terminology to navigate the various tools and configurations, and understand Google Cloud's configuration structure to perform even the most basic operations. So the learning curve is quite steep, but after a few months, it gets easier to maintain.
Read full review
Microsoft Access is easy to use. It is compatible with spreadsheets. It is a very good data management tool. There is scope to save a large amount of data in one place. For using this database, one does not need much training, can be shared among multiple users. This database has to sort and filtering features which seem to be very useful.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
No answers on this topic
I don't think the program has ever failed me. It is one of those programs where there is always a solution if you know where to look.
Read full review
Support Rating
GCP support in general requires a support agreement. For small organizations like us, this is not affordable or reasonable. It would help if Google had a support mechanism for smaller organizations. It was a steep learning curve for us because this was our first entry into the cloud database world. Better documentation also would have helped.
Read full review
While I have never contacted Microsoft directly for product support, for some reason there's a real prejudice against MS Access among most IT support professionals. They are usually discouraging when it comes to using MS Access. Most of this is due to their lack of understanding of MS Access and how it can improve one's productivity. If Microsoft invested more resources towards enhancing and promoting the use of MS Access then maybe things would be different.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
there is no key idea, since it is easy to implement Microsoft Access
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Unlike other products, Google Cloud SQL has very flexible features that allow it to be selected for a free trial account so that the product can be analyzed and tested before purchasing it. Integration capabilities with most of the web services tools are easier regarding Google Cloud SQL with its nature and support.
Read full review
Excel is a fantastic - robust application that can do so much so easily. Its easy to train and understand. However - excel does not provide a reporting function and that is typically where we will suggest a move to [Microsoft] Access. [Microsoft] Access requires a little more knowledge of data manipulation.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • The first one is it's performance is very good and it comes up with different solution.
  • Security can be improved for external resources or the schemas which are selected in it.
  • It can be more fragile so one can use it in the business purposes and this will make it a great product.
Read full review
  • Microsoft Access has had a mostly positive impact on our business objectives in that most of our work is funded by grants and those grants need reports with data about our projects. Microsoft Access makes getting and organizing that data very easy.
  • Another positive is that since it is built on an Excel backbone, Excel files can be easily imported into Microsoft Access and also it is easy to export Microsoft Access reports, data sheets, etc. into Excel and some other programs as well. That might help more people who already use Excel learn how to work in a database.
  • I can't really think of a negative impact other than not many people at my workplace have ever used or understand how to use a database. Most people tend to use Excel rather than a database, like Microsoft Access.
Read full review
ScreenShots

Google Cloud SQL Screenshots

Screenshot of migrating to a fully managed database solution - Self-managing a database, such as MySQL, PostgreSQL, or SQL Server, can be inefficient and expensive, with significant effort around patching, hardware maintenance, backups, and tuning. Migrating to a fully managed solution can be done using a Database Migration Service with minimal downtime.Screenshot of data-driven application development - Cloud SQL accelerates application development via integration with the larger ecosystem of Google Cloud services, Google partners, and the open source community.