We compared Snowflake and AWS Lake Formation based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Snowflake is praised for its high performance, scalability, user-friendly interface, and efficient customer support. Users find Snowflake's pricing reasonable and appreciate its positive ROI. On the other hand, AWS Lake Formation is lauded for its flexible pricing, excellent data management capabilities, comprehensive security measures, and seamless integration with other AWS services. Users value its efficient setup process and commendable customer service. Areas for improvement in AWS Lake Formation include usability, access permissions management, data processing speed, documentation, data integration options, and customization features.
Features: Snowflake's valuable features include high performance, scalability, and ease of use. Users appreciate its ability to handle large data volumes quickly. In contrast, AWS Lake Formation offers excellent data management capabilities, comprehensive security measures, and seamless integration with other AWS services. Users enjoy the simple setup process and robust access control mechanisms, ensuring reliable data management and efficient workflows.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Snowflake is seen as reasonable and competitive, with a straightforward and uncomplicated process. Users appreciate the flexible licensing terms and options. On the other hand, AWS Lake Formation offers a flexible and cost-effective pricing model, with a straightforward and hassle-free setup cost. Users value the licensing options provided., The user reviews for Snowflake indicate a positive and beneficial ROI. Similarly, AWS Lake Formation also provides a significant ROI with positive results reported by users.
Room for Improvement: Snowflake has room for improvement in specific areas to enhance user experience and functionality. AWS Lake Formation, on the other hand, needs enhancements in usability, access permissions management, data processing speed, troubleshooting resources, data integration options, and feature customization.
Deployment and customer support: The reviews highlight that when evaluating the duration required for a new tech solution, Snowflake users emphasize distinguishing between deployment and setup phases, while AWS Lake Formation users have varying timeframes for deployment, setup, and implementation, suggesting that these phases should be considered separately., Snowflake's customer service has received positive feedback for promptness and effectiveness. Users appreciate the expertise and helpful guidance provided by the support team. AWS Lake Formation's customer service is also commendable, with users valuing their responsiveness, expertise, and commitment to customer success.
The summary above is based on 43 interviews we conducted recently with Snowflake and AWS Lake Formation users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The solution is quite good at handling analytics. It's done a good job at helping us centralize them."
"The solution has many features that are applicable to events such as audits."
"The most important advantage in using AWS Lake Formation is its ability to connect the data lake to the other technologies in AWS. This is what I advise my clients."
"We use AWS Lake Formation typically for the data warehouse."
"It is seamlessly integrated within the AWS ecosystem, making it straightforward to manage access patterns for AWS-native services."
"The tool's performance is good. I think it's the best in the game right now. It usually charges per query. For example, if you run a SQL query on Snowflake with the same number of data records, it would take less than half the time compared to running it on Microsoft. It has good documentation. You can pick up Snowflake if you have previous knowledge of SQL."
"The feature that is really striking is the ability to translate the SQL workloads into the NoSQL version that can be used by Snowflake."
"This solution has helped our organization by being easy to maintain and having good technical support."
"The tool is very easy to use. The solution’s desktop features are also very easy to use. Also, the product’s SQL-based connectivity is also good. It can connect with any tool."
"The pricing is reasonable and matches the rest of the market."
"The most valuable features of Snowflake are its performance and power."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The solution's computing time is less."
"The solution could make improvements around orchestration and doing some automation stuff on AWS front automation. It would be useful if we could use automation to build images and use hardened images which are CIS compliant."
"It falls short when it comes to more granular access control, such as cell-level or row-level entitlements which is a significant drawback for organizations that require precise control over who can access specific rows of data."
"In our experience what could be improved are not the support, performance or monitoring, but at a managerial level, the very expensive professional services of AWS. This could be an area of improvement for them. It's too expensive to acquire their support."
"For the end-users, it's not as user-friendly as it could be."
"AWS Lake Formation's pricing could be cheaper."
"An additional feature I'd like to see is called materialized views, which can speed up some run times. I'd like it to be able to be used where you can have multiple tables inside them; materialized view. That would be nice. As well as being able to run cursors, to be able to do some bulk updates and some more advanced querying, table building on the fly."
"There are some challenges with loading unstructured data and integrating some message queues or brokers. In one project, we had a problem connecting to one of the message queues and we had to take a different route altogether on Microsoft Azure."
"The documentation could improve. They should provide architecture information."
"I have heard people having difficulty with the machine learning model, so there may be room for improvement."
"There are always a few operation updates here and there that can be made."
"The aspect of it that was more complicated was stored procedures. It does not support SQL language-based stored procedures. You have to write in JavaScript. If they supported SQL language and stored procedures, it would make migration from on-prem much simpler. In most cases, if an on-prem solution has stored procedures, they're usually written in SQL. They're not written as what most on-prem DBMS would refer to as an external stored procedure, which is what these feel like to most people because they're written in a language outside of SQL."
"Sometimes it can be tricky to manage multiple environments if you're purely using Snowflake as your scripting and pipeline environment."
"Snowflake has support for stored procedures, but it is not that powerful."
AWS Lake Formation is ranked 12th in Cloud Data Warehouse with 5 reviews while Snowflake is ranked 1st in Cloud Data Warehouse with 94 reviews. AWS Lake Formation is rated 7.6, while Snowflake is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of AWS Lake Formation writes "Strategically aligning data management in a multi-cloud environment with significant reporting challenges". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Snowflake writes "Good usability, good data sharing and elastic compute features, and requires less DBA involvement". AWS Lake Formation is most compared with Azure Data Factory, Amazon Redshift, Microsoft Azure Synapse Analytics, BigQuery and Amazon EMR, whereas Snowflake is most compared with BigQuery, Azure Data Factory, Teradata, Vertica and Oracle Autonomous Data Warehouse. See our AWS Lake Formation vs. Snowflake report.
See our list of best Cloud Data Warehouse vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Data Warehouse 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.