Google Compute Engine is an infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS) product from Google Cloud. It provides virtual machines with carbon-neutral infrastructure which run on the same data centers that Google itself uses.
$0.01
Hour
SiteGround
Score 9.8 out of 10
N/A
SiteGround offers website hosting, as well as managed WordPress, managed Woo Commerce, fully managed cloud services available to support a variety of services, as well as reselling.
$14.99
per month
Pricing
Google Compute Engine
SiteGround
Editions & Modules
Preemptible Price - Predefined Memory
0.000892 / GB
Hour
Three-year commitment price - Predefined Memory
$0.001907 / GB
Hour
One-year commitment price - Predefined Memory
$0.002669 / GB
Hour
On-demand price - Predefined Memory
$0.004237 / GB
Hour
Preemptible Price - Predefined vCPUs
0.006655 / vCPU
Hour
Three-year commitment price - Predefined vCPUS
$0.014225 / CPU
Hour
One-year commitment price - Predefined vCPUS
$0.019915 / vCPU
Hour
On-demand price - Predefined vCPUS
$0.031611 / vCPU
Hour
StartUp 24 months
$14.99
per month
StartUp 12 months
$17.99
per month
StartUp 1 month
$24.99
per month
GrowBig 24 months
$24.99
per month
GrowBig 12 months
$29.99
per month
GrowBig 1 month
$34.99
per month
GoGeek 24 months
$39.99
per month
GoGeek 12 months
$44.99
per month
GoGeek 1 month
$49.99
per month
GoGeek 3 months
$49.99
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Google Compute Engine
SiteGround
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
Prices vary according to region (i.e US central, east, & west time zones). Google Compute Engine also offers a discounted rate for a 1 & 3 year commitment.
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Google Compute Engine
SiteGround
Considered Both Products
Google Compute Engine
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Google Compute Engine
Cloud providers offering virtual machines are quite common. I think, Google, however, is arguably one of the top players in the market, with some of the largest (if not the largest) and most advanced server farms in the world. If you're looking for reliability and cost …
The perfect blend of setup flexibility, costing and trust of Google could be my answer to the comparison. This being a server backed service so, ruling out the functions. The Setup flexibility and speed set the GCE apart from Kubernetes. Compliance, regulation and the security …
We have tried using DigitalOcean droplets for some of our minor and non critical VMs. In our experience, Google Compute Engine fares well in comparison the DigitalOcean droplets as they provide better availability, better support and in general, a better experience.
As far as user-friendliness is concerned, I personally rank Google Cloud above both AWS and Azure. Their user interface makes it easy to manage, which is important.
I find Google Compute Engine to be much easier to use than Amazon's EC2 service. The console makes much more sense, permission management is much cleaner, and I'd say the other categories feel on par with EC2: performance, how fine-grained the settings are, connecting to …
The obvious and natural alternatives to GCE are AWS EC2 and Azure VMs. I would say all three are more similar than not. Picking one will most likely depend on what platform you're on already, where your running services are, and which one is more familiar to your team.
When configuring Amazon ECS, it is a bit confusing as you are not able to find the actual issue. You need to enable Additional AppInsights to get detailed level info, which is not a concern when configuring on the Instance Level. Moreover, Azure VM does not provide an …
The Google Cloud computing engine is fair at the top because it bills customers, automatic discounting for extended use, and how fast it can be turned on. We enjoy things around setting it up very easily via APIs and CLI commands, and with the always-on recommendations from …
I have utilised Google Compute Engine in addition to Amazon EC2. Both exhibit excellent performance in terms of consumption, speed, and efficiency.My decision to adopt Google Compute Engine was solely based on how user-friendly it is. more basic UI/UX than EC2.Google's customer …
Google Compute Engine provides on-demand computing resources that are easy to scale up or down according to my organization needs. This allows our business to quickly adapt to changes in demand without having to invest in additional hardware. It also offers a very competitive …
While Amazon EC2 is the best tool for developers to build an app and make it live, It has some downsides too. EC2 requires so much development while Google Compute Engine makes it easy to build an app within a days. EC2 pricing also relatively high compare to Google Compute …
GCE is available in 3 different regions whereas Ec2 is available in 11 different regions. The compute resources offered by the GCE has lower maximum capacity compared to AWS Ec2. The pricing model of GCE offers first 10 mins free and then charging in increments of 10 mins. Both …
I prefer the Compute Engine Over these as it provides us with Better Scalability, Performance, and Reliability Security-related Issues don't arise with the Compute Engine, but yes, in terms of accessing or running, it can be improved a bit as compared to EC2 offered by AWS.
the main reason of choosing GCE is availability and user friendly UI with a very good documentation and API explanations. Great visibility over the infra and security.
The features specific to Google Compute Engine vs Amazon EC2 along with cost and availability are comparable, there may be other services within the vendor which may mean that one is more suitable for specific applications than the other one. We have used both for different …
Google Compute Engine provides a one stop solution for all the complex features and the UI is better than Amazon's EC2 and Azure Machine learning for ease of usability.
It's always good to have an eco-system of products from Google as it's one of the most used search engine and …
AWS has become the de facto standard. Skills in Google Compute Engine and AWS are not easily transferable. Still, after getting to know Google Compute Engine well, productivity can be very high and ROI impressive. There are many additional services offered around Google Compute …
I used Namescheap in the past. I believe Namescheap is a big company compared to SiteGround, as big as godaddy. I think because of that, you get what you expect. Good services, but maybe more costly and you have to pay for everything as extra. Email $5, SSL $10, CDN $10 etc …
SiteGround had superior customer service and site uptime. Overall we found SiteGround, an easier provider to work with, both from a user interface and customer experience perspective. It was much easier to set up a Wordpress build using SiteGround than through iPage, and we …
I chose SiteGround because we needed that personal touch. Other service providers we have used before have terrible customer/tech support. We chose SiteGround and we will continue to use them as our quality service provider because their technical support has been outstanding. …
Sadly, most web hosting companies are either not user-friendly or lack necessary features. No other web hosting company I've used has provided the level of reliability, features, and affordability that I've found with SiteGround with the exception of WP Engine which is a …
In terms of customer support in resolving tickets, I believe SiteGround is much better than others out there. Unlike Bluehost which when reached puts your call on hold and have longer waiting queues then SiteGround. They do followup to see if you are running into issues. They …
GoDaddy and BlueHost offer grossly sub-par performance in 2017 for a price point that doesn't make sense. At least GoDaddy has great tech support - but I shouldn't have to rely on it as often as I do if all was working as it should.
SiteGround is the BEST option if you are looking for price and have a small web project. Compared to other services who want to say the same, I never had a site go down, reach memory capacity, have my information sold off to, etc. SiteGround provides what they say they can …
It is excellent if you have any workloads that need raw computing or plan to have any state-full services running in your environment like DBs (for which you don't want to use Managed services), cache, etc. It also gives you complete control over which versions of software, OS, etc., you need, and thus, you can build anything and deploy it on GCE.
I used other hosting providers in the past and actually I'm very happy with SiteGround mainly because of this: * very quick to setup and install my Wordpress website * sends me weekly emails about traffic, website healthscore etc * great wordpress plugins to help with SEO and optimizing
A simple web-based interface that is a breeze to train new engineers to use. Our experienced engineers never have trouble finding or doing anything on GCE.
Sustained use and Committed use discounts mean we get top-tier VMs for an incredibly competitive price.
Wonderful identity and access management that gives us peace-of-mind when granting access to machines to contractors and other 3rd parties.
Fast VMs, lastest in hardware, and enough RAM to power even the hungriest of our services.
You get a number of page views as a guide to your bandwidth, and a fixed amount of disk space on the server. So you know what you have to work with. No hazy promises of “unlimited” resources.
If you pay more, you’re allocated a server with fewer accounts, so there’s less chance you’ll be slowed down by your neighbors.
Its self-help material is pretty good — close to InMotion Hosting for knowledgebase quality.
SiteGround tackles slow speeds from all angles, using SSD storage, Nginx, SuperCacher, CloudFlare CDN, and HHVM.
The L7 load balancer can be difficult to get set up. It's limited in its functionality, especially with the container engine.
It's hard to find certain objects on the web console. Often times the things I need to get to are buried in advanced menus.
Google's decision to only support MySQL on their relational DB service means that I have to manage Postgres instances in Compute on my own, managing everything from storage to backups.
Its pretty good, easy and good performance. Also, interface is very good for starters compared to competitors. Infra as Code (IaC) using Terraform even added easiness for creation, management and deletion of compute Virtual Machines (VM). Overall, very good and very easy cloud based compute platform which simplified infrastructure, very much recommend.
Having interacted with several cloud services, GCE stands out to me as more usable than most. The naming and locating of features is a little more intuitive than most I've interacted with, and hinting is also quite helpful. Getting staff up to speed has proven to be overall less painful than others.
Google Compute Engine works well for cloud project with lesser geographical audience. It sometimes gives error while everything is set up perfectly. We also keep on check any updates available because that's one reason of site getting down. Google Compute Engine is ultimately a top solution to build an app and publish it online within a few minutes
The raw computer power is excellent; our applications feel snappy, pages load almos instantly for our customers and so on. The primary reason it is not a perfect 10 is that the native tools for monitoring individual VM performance can be complex, making it challenging to easily diagnose specific resource bottlenecks without significant configuration
The documentation needs to be better for intermediate users - There are first steps that one can easily follow, but after that, the documentation is often spotty or not in a form where one can follow the steps and accomplish the task. Also, the documentation and the product often go out of sync, where the commands from the documentation do not work with the current version of the product.
Google support was great and their presence on site was very helpful in dealing with various issues.
Three ways to get customer support, phone, email, and chat. Chat is available 24/7 and the agents are always friendly and very helpful. In all the instances where I needed assistance chat support agents were always available to help. Wait time is minimal and on rare occasions I had to call, the agents were very helpful as well. I can not remember a time I walked away from support without my question or concern being resolved.
When configuring Amazon ECS, it is a bit confusing as you are not able to find the actual issue. You need to enable Additional AppInsights to get detailed level info, which is not a concern when configuring on the Instance Level. Moreover, Azure VM does not provide an in-browser option; instead, it is Azure Bastion, but for that, you have to enable a dedicated subnet, which is a bit unnecessary.
GoDaddy and Bluehost offer grossly sub-par performance in 2017 for a price point that doesn't make sense. At least GoDaddy has great tech support - but I shouldn't have to rely on it as often as I do if all was working as it should. inMotion was overly complex on the backend, and lacked some common hosting features (easy WordPress installs for one) that are common across all other hosts. WPEngine, had great performance, and decent support, but their own proprietary backend interface was always a shift when switching between them and cpanel. Also - VERY expensive compared to SiteGround for comparable (if not lesser) service & performance.
Scalability means flexibility and less upfront costs
Can become expensive when hard set compute requirements are clear, but things like Spot VMs can help here too, or just having your own infrastructure and scaling up with Google. This is for more advanced cases though
Ramp up time is long, but after that it is quick to do many things and ROI is awesome
All the sites I've set up at SiteGround are performing faster than they did at their previous hosting provider. This yields a superior customer experience and higher Google/SEO rankings.
Their service has been rock solid, necessitating little support (which is admittedly less than ideal for my support business, but a boon for my clients bottom line) and zero downtime.
Easy to get new sites up and running, which speeds creation of new businesses and rapid deployment of conceptual campaigns.