We performed a comparison between Google Compute Engine and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's the most engineer-friendly product compared to Amazon AWS or Azure."
"Everything is simple and useful. The initial setup is not challenging."
"The initial setup is reasonably straightforward. It's a handful of networks and a handful of computers."
"The most valuable feature is auto-scaling."
"The solution is readily available, and software engineers can provision it. It is scalable and allows self-service."
"The support for ephemeral instances has been particularly valuable for me. It allows me to significantly reduce costs for temporary virtual machines by automatically destroying them once they are no longer needed, which can result in cost savings of up to 90 percent. Additionally, the solution is easy to use."
"The solution helps to direct SSH into the machine at the click of a button. It also helps to deploy container images right from the UI. There is no need to manage the containers on the machine. I also like the tool’s Spot provision model."
"Google is managing all hardware. You don't need to provision or pre-provision your computer engine."
"The most valuable part of the Oracle Cloud Platform is the ability to develop applications that help us migrate information from on-prem to the cloud."
"We are not using any features offered by OCI but only using virtual machines. So our data only syncs from our On-premises to cloud. The compute and performance are better than other cloud solutions."
"I find the Single Sign-On, SSO, feature to be valuable."
"The solution offers many features and it is a complete replica of our data center."
"The most valuable feature of Oracle Cloud is the digital assistant."
"What I like best about Oracle Cloud is that it is an all-in-one system for everything."
"I head the sales and marketing team. So, specifically on the feature set side, multi-tenancy is the one that I'm most familiar with. It's also the one that we found to be the most beneficial to us because it allows us to take clients that have multiple sites. For instance, one of our larger clients, which is a bank based out of South Africa, has offices in multiple countries. It allows us to multi-tenant each and create a tenant for each country within multi-tenanted architecture."
"We appreciate the fact that this solution will operate with both native and third-party applications. This has meant that we don't need to change all of our systems to accommodate it within our network."
"It has some limitations. For example, you don't get through layer two connectivity. So I've had some difficulty deploying custom VMs. For example, you can't deploy a KVM file to file directly on GCP."
"There have been instances when a customer has tried to deploy a certain number of VMs inside a project, and they come across quota issues."
"The licensing process is not a very straightforward process."
"Google Compute Engine needs to have multi-region support. It would also be nice to have a tracking mechanism."
"I would like to improve the solution’s UI while deploying a container. It is sometimes hard to figure out the container’s details and format that you want to deploy. The tool does not give you a guide to find out the error and why the container is not starting up which could be because you have configured it wrong. This is always a hit on the setup."
"It is not very user-friendly for non-experienced users"
"It would be better if there was an option to change the background. Like in Gmail, there's an option to change your theme."
"I rate the product's stability around five to six out of ten."
"The price of the subscription is too high and excludes some potential customers."
"It isn't easy to get qualified people who know how to work on this tool. All my administrators are learning as they go. Since this is the only cloud solution provider in Saudi Arabia, and it has only been around for one year, I am sure that this will change with time."
"The configuration through the cloud is complicated. It's not straightforward."
"Nowadays, every SR is referred to Oracle Cloud Connect without a person actually handling the customer."
"It takes more time to release resources than one of its competitors."
"Oracle support could be better; we had cases where certain regions experienced specific issues and received little help from Oracle."
"The product could use some more development and maturity so it has more peripheral functionality already integrated."
"I think that there could be a more user-friendly environment when it comes to the options that Oracle presents through the Oracle Cloud Platform."
More Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Google Compute Engine is ranked 10th in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 13 reviews while Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) is ranked 3rd in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 91 reviews. Google Compute Engine is rated 8.8, while Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Google Compute Engine writes "A cost-effective and quite an elastic solution ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) writes "Cost-effective and can be used to host OIC and APEX". Google Compute Engine is most compared with Google App Engine, whereas Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) is most compared with Microsoft Azure, Amazon AWS, Google Cloud, IBM Public Cloud and Red Hat OpenShift. See our Google Compute Engine vs. Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) report.
See our list of best Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) vendors.
We monitor all Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
