We performed a comparison between Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Google Cloud Storage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most beneficial feature of the product for data storage stems from the fact that it serves as a shared file storage."
"We can run code and deploy it whenever we want."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"Its elasticity and flexible pricing are the most valuable. For Amazon EFS, you are charged based on the storage. It is also very fast and stable with a very simple and intuitive interface."
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The solution is scalable."
"EFS is flexible."
"Everything I store in the solution is available on all of my devices."
"Google Cloud is handy and easy to use."
"One of the most valuable features of the solution is its ease of use."
"From a stability standpoint, the solution is excellent. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Google Cloud Storage is fast, and it's scalable."
"The solution is stable and has good performance."
"It’s very stable."
"The feature we've found most valuable is the ability to access our data anywhere, anytime."
"Specifically, when it comes to the file system for the learning system, we encountered performance issues with both Azure and AWS."
"Around 80 percent of the features of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) are available on Linux and not in Windows, making it a major drawback of the product."
"The product's stability has some shortcomings where improvements are required."
"It could be better in connecting with Windows Server instances."
"It should be simplified. There are people who don't have cloud experience. It should be storage that we are able to just connect to."
"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."
"The lack of transparency in the costs attached to the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The user activity needs to be more connected."
"I would like the storage to be less expensive."
"It would be helpful to offer more packages to increase the storage."
"I would like more storage available."
"The user experience needs to be simplified."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
"Having more storage space would be an improvement."
"The solution only allows so much space for free."
"It is hard to migrate to another product if we want to."
More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is ranked 5th in Cloud Storage with 10 reviews while Google Cloud Storage is ranked 2nd in Cloud Storage with 66 reviews. Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is rated 8.6, while Google Cloud Storage is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) writes "Offers integration capabilities that improve areas like storage and security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Google Cloud Storage writes "Flexible, reliable, and beneficial for small sized companies". Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon S3 Glacier, Azure NetApp Files and Amazon S3, whereas Google Cloud Storage is most compared with Amazon S3 Glacier, AT&T Cloud Storage, Microsoft Azure File Storage, Google Workspace and Amazon S3. See our Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Google Cloud Storage report.
See our list of best Cloud Storage vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Storage 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.