Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Google Compute Engine vs Linode: What are the differences?
Introduction
In this comparison, we will highlight key differences between Google Compute Engine and Linode.
Performance: Google Compute Engine offers high performance virtual machines with access to the latest processors and hardware, ensuring efficient and fast computations. Linode, on the other hand, provides excellent performance with SSD storage options, but may not match the level of performance offered by Google Compute Engine.
Managed Services: Google Compute Engine comes with a wide range of managed services such as load balancing, auto-scaling, and integrated monitoring tools, making it easier for users to manage their infrastructure efficiently. Linode, while offering basic managed services, may require more manual setup and configuration.
Pricing Structure: Google Compute Engine utilizes a pay-as-you-go pricing structure, allowing users to pay only for the resources they use without any upfront costs. Linode, in comparison, offers a simple flat-rate pricing model with predictable costs, which can be advantageous for users with steady workloads.
Global Reach: Google Compute Engine has a vast network of data centers located across the globe, enabling users to deploy their resources closer to their target audience for improved latency and performance. Linode, although having multiple data centers, may not have the same extensive global reach as Google Compute Engine.
Support and Documentation: Google Compute Engine provides extensive documentation, guides, and customer support to assist users in setting up and managing their infrastructure. Linode also offers good support options, including a helpful community forum, but may not have the same level of comprehensive documentation and resources as Google Compute Engine.
In Summary, Google Compute Engine excels in performance, managed services, and global reach, while Linode offers a simple pricing structure, good support options, and competitive performance with SSD storage.
Albeit restricted to only a few places worlwide compared to its peers in the cloud segment, I am yet to find another provider capable of delivering a score over 5000 (Geekbench) in a benchmark on a single CPU machine, and each machine costs $6 a month. For homelab and experienced users who don't need DBaaS or IaaC's, it's a pretty straightforward choice. A more comprehensive review of Vultr's HF machines can be found here.
Chose Hetnzer over DigitalOcean and Linode because Hetzner provides much cheaper VPS with much better specs. DigitalOcean might seems like a good choice at first because of how popular it is. But in reality, if all you need is a simple VPS, you won't benefit much from the their oversubscribed datacenters which often underperform other competitors. Linode is also a good choice. They have cheaper options and performs slightly better than DigitalOcean. In the end, choosing a more affordable host helps you save money. That's important when you're running a tight ship.
GCE is much more user friendly than EC2, though Amazon has come a very long way since the early days (pre-2010's). This can be seen in how easy it is to edit the storage attached to an instance in GCE: it's under the instance details and is edited inline. In AWS you have to click the instance > click the storage block device (new screen) > click the edit option (new modal) > resize the volume > confirm (new model) then wait a very long time. Google's is nearly instant.
- In both cases, the instance much be shut down.
There also the preference between "user burden-of-security" and automatic security: AWS goes for the former, GCE the latter.