Amazon Web Services vs. IBM Power Virtual Server

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Amazon Web Services
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Amazon Web Services (AWS) is a subsidiary of Amazon that provides on-demand cloud computing services. With over 165 services offered, AWS services can provide users with a comprehensive suite of infrastructure and computing building blocks and tools.
$0
per month
IBM Power Virtual Server
Score 7.3 out of 10
N/A
IBM presents their Power Systems Virtual Server as a scalable, cost-effective way to run IBM AIX, IBM i and Linux workloads​.N/A
Pricing
Amazon Web ServicesIBM Power Virtual Server
Editions & Modules
Free Tier
$0
per month
Basic Environment
$100 - $200
per month
Intermediate Environment
$250 - $600
per month
Advanced Environment
$600-$2500
per month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon Web ServicesIBM Power Virtual Server
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeOptional
Additional DetailsAWS allows a “save when you commit” option that offers lower prices when you sign up for a 1- or 3- year term that includes an AWS service or category of services.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon Web ServicesIBM Power Virtual Server
Considered Both Products
Amazon Web Services
Chose Amazon Web Services
In my personal experience, AWS is superior to both GCP and Azure in the majority of usable applications. GCP suffers from the near total misunderstanding of how support system is even supposed to work, and while _some_ services are pretty nifty and well-polished, some are …
Chose Amazon Web Services
AWS stands out in its ability to adapt technology more quickly. All the new features, first adapted by AWS, make it the market leader. The key metrics, such as MTTR, are among the best among all other cloud service providers. The AWS dashboard and analytics features are very …
Chose Amazon Web Services
Amazon Web Services Lambda supports more triggers, richer language/runtime support, and has tighter integrations with Amazon Web Services, as compared to Azure/Google Cloud functions.Amazon Web Services also has better global infrastructure, with 33 regions and 105 availability …
Chose Amazon Web Services
We tried various other cloud providers and features provided by them.
Many of the cloud providers have similar features but there are few factors which make Amazon Web Services cloud as preferable choice of our bank are cost, location of Amazon Web Services datacenter where it …
Chose Amazon Web Services
Apart from Amazon Web Services, we use Microsoft Azure in some of our projects. I have some basic experience in Google Cloud Platform (GCP) as well. If given a choice, I would prefer using Amazon Web Services over Azure or GCP. I find provisioning of resources relatively faster …
Chose Amazon Web Services
we feel that Azure is a little more clunky and not as user friendly as the AWS model.
Chose Amazon Web Services
Amazon Web Services is better among all of them due to its performance, stability, security and navigation. It effectively saves the cost and provides better facilities than the other competitors. It plays great role when it comes to user friendly interface. It also provided …
Chose Amazon Web Services
AWS has the largest market share and most established and over 200 services for diverse needs. AWS has a very power user interface and pay as you go work well that others. AWS has the by far largest network of data centers for low latency and high availability. The regular …
Chose Amazon Web Services

Better global availability and use across industries.
AWS has a great ecosystem of experts, developers, solution architects and it helps to get to know them at various AWS events across the world
Chose Amazon Web Services
Ive only used amazon web services for cloud computing, and the decision was made by the CTO.
Chose Amazon Web Services
Amazon Web Services is much more mature than all of the cloud service providers out in the market. It has 300+ services that solve almost all of your cloud problems.
Chose Amazon Web Services
Compared to other providers like Google Cloud Platform(GCP) and Microsoft Azure, [Amazon Web Services] has a wider range of services, which help you easier implement the solution you want. Also, they have been in the market for more years than their competitors. Moreover, they …
Chose Amazon Web Services
Amazon SageMaker is being extensively used by our R&D department for machine learning models development and research purposes. We work in Jupyter notebooks hosted on SageMaker notebook instances rather than notebooks hosted in local machines by doing so most ML algorithms …
Chose Amazon Web Services
Terrible. Same as above.
Chose Amazon Web Services
I feel AWS usage of services by global clients has been the most compared to Azure or Openshift.
AWS service offering's and usage are economical and much more secured. Its has build an ecosystem of providing all the services capabilities under one umbrella . It provides …
Chose Amazon Web Services
The decision was made to go with AWS because of name recognition and familiarity by contractors we hired. I checked out Google Compute Engine a few years ago, and it did have similar option set, however Google in general was behind Amazon's offerings.
Chose Amazon Web Services
Amazon Web Services fits best for all levels of organisations like startup, mid level or enterprise. The services are easy to use and doesn't require a high level of understanding as you can learn via blogs or youtube videos. AWS is Reasonable in cost as the plan is pay as you …
Chose Amazon Web Services
Amazon Web Services is well suited when we have a huge amount of data to store, process, manipulate and get meaningful information out of. It is also suitable when we need very fast data retrieval from the database. They provide a superior product at a fair price which allows …
Chose Amazon Web Services
Both the services are in the field for quite sometime. And the biggest competitor of Amazon Web Services is Microsoft Azure. Though, Azure easily connects with Microsoft services like a jelly, even in AWS its so easy. And the best thing is due to its vast variety community …
Chose Amazon Web Services
Amazon Web Services has a much more seasoned and known set of tools. The learning resources and documentation is much more prevalent and applicable to more scenarios which definitely helps with implementation. Google cloud does offer comparable products, and the user interface …
Chose Amazon Web Services
We evaluated Google Cloud and Azure at the beginning of our cloud journey but at that time, AWS was so far ahead of the other public cloud providers that there was no question about whether or not to go with AWS. They have the broadest catalog of services and their support is …
Chose Amazon Web Services
We have investigated Azure as well, for this specific need it made the most sense to go with [Amazon Web Services], the design was much simpler to get going. We have also used Azure for some of the other deployments that we have done with SaaS systems. These are the two …
Chose Amazon Web Services
Our tech team was comfortable with Amazon Web Services and that is why we started with Amazon Web Services. In the meantime, we searched for other services like Amazon Web Services but it seems that facilities like Elastic Bean and the first year free made us stick to Amazon …
IBM Power Virtual Server
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
it is much better with unix lpars
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
There were different factors which were involved in terms of evaluating IBM as a preferred choice over other offering because of performance and reliability in terms of high performance computing and overall enterprise great feature in terms of critical application which …
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
Power Virtual Servers stacks up well against the competition. It's easy to use and highly reliable. I would recommend it over any of the other solutions.
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
IBM Power Virtual Server integrates well with other IBM tools in use with the firm and helps with firmwide support. Security is critical for our business and IBM has a long-standing reputation and expertise in delivering in this area.
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
It best suited for test environment when we are testing our software.It is best suited for running most of the old application.Its navigation easy and can be handled from one place.For production environment there is still room improvement while the using it.
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
They both have their own ups and downs and it totally depends on the team which suits them best. IBM Power Virtual Server has Performance, Scalability, Reliability and Availability, Compatibility, and Good Vendor Support. The specific use case and workload requirements played a …
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
The pricing of IBM Power Virtual Server was extremely fair and feasible compared with other products like Windows or Suse or Redhat. The ease of use of IBM Power Virtual Server is also really great with an excellent UI. It is also capable in handling high analytical workloads …
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
IBM Power Virtual Server has been easier to use in hybrid environments than any other options considered. Workload balancing works amazing. Our organization was already using IBM services for storage and managing databases, which influenced us to go for the service. Some of …
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
IBM Power Virtual Server is very cost-efficient, movement flexible, and easy to use and maintain.
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
With the IBM Power Virtual Server, we can quickly create and deploy one or more virtual servers (that are running either the AIX, IBM i, or Linux operating systems). After the provision the IBM Power Virtual Server, one get access to infrastructure and physical computing …
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
Skytap on IBM Cloud or Skytap on Azure can be cheaper, but PowerVS provides fast storage with low latency and high speed Internet connection options.
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
Amazon Web Services and Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
We chose IBM Power System Virtual Server because other services are too expensive, and we need a server that is both affordable and scalable.
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
IBM Power System components are more reliable and have longer uptimes than those of competing systems. The IBM Power System Virtual Server setup and configuration process was simple. To now, no errors have been made in terms of placing an unreasonable burden on the server, …
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
IBM Power System Virtual Server, in my opinion, is more cost-effective for small and medium-sized organizations than Microsoft Azure. When contrasted with Microsoft Azure, IBM Cloud offers superior load balancing, continuous performance, and network monitoring. There is …
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
Amazon Web Services is slightly less in cost However this fact is far out shadowed by the superior customization and efficiency of the IBM Power system Virtual Server. IBM also provides far superior customer service.
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
The success of IBM's Power System is largely dependent on security. Its reliability is a crucial component in its widespread use, as it enables complex businesses such as banking and insurance to operate with greater security and less downtime. This system has a low power …
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
The success of IBM's power system is largely dependent on security. Its reliability is a crucial component in its widespread use, as it enables complex businesses such as banking and insurance to operate with greater security and less downtime. This system has a low power …
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
The success of IBM's power system is largely dependent on security. Its reliability is a crucial component in its widespread use, as it enables complex businesses such as banking and insurance to operate with greater security and less downtime. This system has a low power …
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
When compared to the IBM cloud, virtual server selections, installations, and updates are straightforward. First and foremost, the user interface is simple, allowing us to quickly select and change settings in essential situations. AWS offers a huge range of instances to choose …
Chose IBM Power Virtual Server
Security is the major factor to derive the success of IBM power system. Its robustness is the key factor for its wide usage and it allows to help run complex business like Banking, Insurance with Shear security and less downtime .
Power complexity and usage is very low with this …
Features
Amazon Web ServicesIBM Power Virtual Server
Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS)
Comparison of Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) features of Product A and Product B
Amazon Web Services
8.2
Ratings
2% above category average
IBM Power Virtual Server
8.5
Ratings
6% above category average
Service-level Agreement (SLA) uptime9.30 Ratings8.70 Ratings
Dynamic scaling9.00 Ratings8.20 Ratings
Elastic load balancing9.70 Ratings8.60 Ratings
Pre-configured templates7.40 Ratings8.50 Ratings
Monitoring tools7.00 Ratings8.30 Ratings
Pre-defined machine images6.40 Ratings8.40 Ratings
Operating system support8.10 Ratings8.50 Ratings
Security controls8.30 Ratings8.70 Ratings
Automation8.70 Ratings8.30 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Amazon Web ServicesIBM Power Virtual Server
Small Businesses
DigitalOcean Droplets
DigitalOcean Droplets
Score 8.7 out of 10
DigitalOcean Droplets
DigitalOcean Droplets
Score 8.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.5 out of 10
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.5 out of 10
Enterprises
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.5 out of 10
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.5 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Amazon Web ServicesIBM Power Virtual Server
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
8.1
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.4
(0 ratings)
9.9
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.4
(0 ratings)
7.2
(0 ratings)
Availability
9.0
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
7.2
(0 ratings)
8.1
(0 ratings)
Online Training
7.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Configurability
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Vendor post-sale
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Amazon Web ServicesIBM Power Virtual Server
Likelihood to Recommend
We are using RDS for the database services. With RDS, we don't have to manage much, as most of the DBA tasks are automated. For development purposes, we are using Kubernetes pods, which makes it easy to deploy applications and scale up as needed. AWS integration with in-house applications is seamless, making it easy to keep a data-sensitive application on-premises while still utilizing AWS services.
Read full review
Due to its reliability, it is well-suited for mission-critical applications. It is also well suited for running multiple applications on a single server and fully utilizing the server's full capacity. However, it is not well suited for servers that require dedicated IO resources.
Read full review
Pros
  • Starting an instance and accessing it for testing purpose, demo or production deployment its always easy.
  • All the things which are available over AWS are pretty well managed and easy to use.
  • You might find everything you required for an product and other development over AWS.
  • Its suitable for both either an enterprise or an startup
  • Various resources and documentation are available in case you struck somewhere.
Read full review
  • It is good in managing our documents in a precise manner.
  • It is a comprehensive tool and supports other languages like JAVA and Python and it is useful for us.
  • It is quite a valuable tool available at a reasonable price in the market and it is a scalable tool.
Read full review
Cons
  • The AWS Management Console can be overwhelming. so a better dashboard and organizing it would improve usability.
  • The pricing models are complex. We need a more clear price calculators and cost management tools to manage our expenses better.
  • Enhancements in cross service compatibility and easier third party integrations could streamline workflow.
  • Simplifying model training in SageMaker and improving IAM for granular access control would make AWS more user friendly
Read full review
  • The software appears to be geared for a no-programming approach, which implies that making changes is more difficult.
  • The user base is small making it monotonous and difficult to come up with new methods.
  • The number of rankings is not as large as competitors.
  • The admin end is poorly designed, as they are unable to receive and respond to client feedback.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
I would gladly rely on AWS for any large-scale application deployment. For prototyping and small-scale applications, a more heavily managed environment on top of the 'bare metal' virtual infrastructure, such as Heroku or Elastic Bean Stalk, is probably a more productive approach in most cases
Read full review
At the moment we are 100% satisfied with the performance and our support team is well used to the process involved. So unless we have some major issues in adopting, we are sure to be with IBM itself.
Read full review
Usability
Amazon Web Services is a great tool when it comes to middle size organizations like us. It provides multiple tools and functionalities in low costs. The best feature we have to pay as we go. No financial burden on company for the unused instances. It also comes with greater level of security such as two level authorization such as multi factor authorization.
Read full review
I would rate IBM Power Virtual Server’s overall usability as an 8 out of 10. The platform offers a solid interface and intuitive dashboard, making it relatively easy for users with cloud experience to navigate. Its scalability and flexibility are strong points. However, the learning curve for new users can be steep, especially when dealing with complex integrations or configurations. While documentation and support are extensive, some users may find the setup process challenging. Overall, it’s highly functional but could be streamlined further for beginners.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Availability is very good, with the exception of occasional spectacular outages.
Read full review
Very easy to use.
Read full review
Performance
AWS does not provide the raw performance that you can get by building your own custom infrastructure. However, it is often the case that the benefits of specialized, high-performance hardware do not necessarily outweigh the significant extra cost and risk. Performance as perceived by the user is very different from raw throughput.
Read full review
Easy to use.
Read full review
Support Rating
The customer support of Amazon Web Services are quick in their responses. I appreciate its entire team, which works amazingly, and provides professional support. AWS is a great tool, indeed, to provide customers a suitable way to
immediately search for their compatible software's and also to guide them in a
good direction. Moreover, this product is a good suggestion for every type of
company because of its affordability and ease of use.
Read full review
As with most IBM products the ongoing support for IBM Power Virtual Server is solid and consistent. IBM provides a clear roadmap for receiving support of their products. Both voice and online response is offered. It is obvious that IBM has the internal systems and culture to maintain support functions. This starts from the initial support call to the problem analysis and continues through the problem resolution. Documentation and communication are consistent within this process.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
The API's were very well documented and was Janova's main point of entry into the services.
Read full review
It is economic.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
In my personal experience, AWS is superior to both GCP and Azure in the majority of usable applications. GCP suffers from the near total misunderstanding of how support system is even supposed to work, and while _some_ services are pretty nifty and well-polished, some are mindbogglingly designed black boxes with self-conflicting documentation. Some of it comes from having legacy systems, sure, but AWS somehow manages, even having a rather big lead start. Azure, from my limited experience, is limited to people somehow coerced into its usage by external constraints. That being said, IF you can design and implement something there, it will probably run fine.
Read full review
There were different factors which were involved in terms of evaluating IBM as a preferred choice over other offering because of performance and reliability in terms of high performance computing and overall enterprise great feature in terms of critical application which outperforms or maybe beat any time other offerings like AWS system manager data availability is one more in terms of disaster recovery solution and high availability feature the kind of offering IBM provide was way more than in terms of other fujitsu server.
Read full review
Scalability
No answers on this topic
I would rate IBM Cognos Analytics’ scalability as a 9 out of 10. The platform is highly capable of handling large volumes of data and supporting thousands of users with ease. Its architecture is designed for high performance, though it may require fine-tuning for extremely complex data environments to maintain optimal performance.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Provisioning resources like large database instances is really quick. We can easily scale our instances up or down as per need.
  • Storing files in S3 instead of onprem NAS drives is much more economical, especially for the files stored in glacier deep archive for compliance purposes.
  • Backup snapshots of EBS volumes and RDS instances may increase the cost of cloud if not cleaned up properly.
Read full review
  • We have had a return on investment of 30%.
  • There have also been 80% fewer application crashes due to a lack of resources that previously ran on the X86 platform.
  • Administration management has been simplified and staff can dedicate themselves to the development of applications, instead of providing support to users when the applications do not respond efficiently, this made staff 45% more productive.
Read full review
ScreenShots