No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Amazon EKS vs Azure Red Hat OpenShift comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon EKS
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
96
Ranking in other categories
Container Management (1st), Container Security (12th)
Azure Red Hat OpenShift
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
PaaS Clouds (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Amazon EKS and Azure Red Hat OpenShift aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Amazon EKS is designed for Container Management and holds a mindshare of 12.8%, down 13.7% compared to last year.
Azure Red Hat OpenShift, on the other hand, focuses on PaaS Clouds, holds 1.2% mindshare, up 0.6% since last year.
Container Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Amazon EKS12.8%
Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform16.6%
VMware Tanzu Platform8.4%
Other62.199999999999996%
Container Management
PaaS Clouds Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Azure Red Hat OpenShift1.2%
Microsoft Azure13.5%
Amazon AWS13.3%
Other72.0%
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

Mahesh Dash - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Consultant at US Contract | Freelancer
Has enabled seamless infrastructure configuration while improving identity integration and monitoring capabilities
It has been since 2019 that I started using Amazon EKS. At that time, it was completely new, and many people were not using it just yet; it started from version 1.21, and right now we are on 1.33. Recently, 1.34 has been launched, but it's not yet available in the service catalog; we can see only 1.33. A lot of improvements have been made. We had numerous add-ons to install manually because Kubernetes is a completely different service than AWS cloud provider, and everyone has opted to use it. After opting, there is an identity that you have to maintain—one at Kubernetes level and one at the AWS provider level. You have to maintain one identity at IAM level and one within the cluster, Amazon EKS. A few things do not make sense within the add-ons, many of the secret providers that read the secret from Secrets Manager and then mount it as a volume. We use a service called EBS CSI driver, which reads the secrets or sensitive data from Secrets Manager and then mounts it as a volume to the pod at runtime. However, that doesn't have a dynamic feature where, if any changes happen in the secrets, it can read and populate in the environment. Sometimes consider your RDS password or OpenSearch password rotates. Amazon EKS doesn't have that feature to read the dynamic one and consider that the password has changed overnight; there is no functionality from the provider to see the changes and then restart the pod or fetch the new value. This often leads to downtime of 12 or even 6 hours, depending on when you realize it, so that needs improvement. Nonetheless, mostly on the add-on side, they have developed a lot; earlier we were installing them manually, but now with EKS auto mode, many things VPC CLI and pod identity service—around four plugins—are installed by default, which is a good thing. However, I believe there should be some solution that is self-contained, covering generic use cases. With the 1.33 release, they have addressed most of my earlier concerns, but I am still looking for some improvements, particularly in CloudWatch monitoring. In IT, we manage two aspects: either the system or the application. Currently, the application logs and monitoring are not very robust in CloudWatch; you can only find things if you are familiar with them. Fortunately, we are familiar, as most of the monitoring involves two types of databases: one is a time series for monitoring data, and the other is an indexing solution for a streaming service. This means we need to get the logs from each node, index them, and populate them on a screen. That part remains a separate service, but if they managed it within Amazon EKS service, where the monitoring is consolidated in one place, you wouldn't need to rely on Prometheus, Grafana, or different services. It would be advantageous to have a consolidated platform for EKS, as Kubernetes is leveraged; monitoring and logging should also be integrated simply by enabling parameters or tags. This would create a self-contained platform where people can onboard and start using it. Currently, I still need to enable logging and monitoring among other things myself; that shouldn't be the case after six or seven years in the market. On a scale from 1 to 10, I would rate Amazon EKS tech support an eight. Some individuals have a deep understanding of the services and can identify potential bottlenecks, especially with load balancer endpoints and certificate management. The shift from NGINX to AWS load balancers has diminished many previous issues. However, not every support engineer meets the same level of expertise, hence why I rate it a solid eight, which I consider decent.
DeepakMishra - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO, Head of Sales and Business Development at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Integrated cloud platform has streamlined app delivery and supported certified marketplace products
A potential area for improvement for Azure Red Hat OpenShift is to see managed identity support and ensure that some of the security features are not conflicting with Azure or Azure product features. I am sure in the future it will be more templatized so that we need not depend on Azure security features. Azure Red Hat OpenShift should be independent of Azure security features with respect to container scan and all that. Why would it use an Azure security feature? That is what I find. It is still yet to be GA and commonly available, but that is a strong reason for improvement.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"AWS cloud services are flexible and have thorough documentation."
"The tool works well with the nodes in AWS. It's scalability is also good in terms of architecture."
"Through Amazon EKS, we can have the blue-green deployment very easily."
"Amazon EKS has very good scalability with 100% uptime and zero latency."
"What I find best about Amazon EKS is its simplicity and that I don't need to care about control plane."
"I have seen a positive impact from Amazon EKS for my organization since deployment; it provides a very robust and cost-effective platform for deploying our applications."
"The most valuable features of Amazon EKS are its auto scaling ability and the ability for service discovery."
"Amazon EKS allows upscaling and downscaling by reallocating resources."
"It supports AKS and other projects like Kubernetes or EKS."
"Technical support from Red Hat is very good."
"Flexibility, a very well-developed interface, and ease of learning are the most valuable features of Azure Red Hat OpenShift."
"The solution's support and its automation tool that ensures we are secure and appropriately configured are the most valuable features of Azure Red Hat OpenShift."
"The most valuable features of the solution are accessibility and scalability."
"As a consulting company, we implement Azure Red Hat OpenShift for our clients, who appreciate its integration capabilities for enhancing cloud operations. While we handle implementation, build processes, and automation, the operational responsibility lies with the customer. The service provides basic processes and support from Red Hat and Microsoft, which benefits clients by allowing them to focus on their business rather than regular operations like cluster upgrades."
"In Kubernetes, when traffic goes out of a pod, it has to have its own IP address. Every service that's going out requires another IP. But with OpenShift, you don't have to deal with any of those IPs because they use NAT."
"Red Hat is a very stable product with good integration with products such as Kubernetes, and it also offers migration tools."
 

Cons

"When we switched to EKS, historically it wasn't good."
"I would like to see the user interface improved because it is hard to find and not straightforward."
"There are some drawbacks regarding Amazon EKS; pricing can increase as clusters and workloads scale, and there is an initial configuration learning curve."
"Amazon EKS can be improved by having the maintenance of Kubernetes versions managed better, as everything is handled by the Kubernetes team and possibly a separate team at AWS."
"We encountered challenges with WebSocket integration when implementing chat functionality on Amazon EKS."
"Sometimes, we face minor connectivity issues."
"Amazon EKS is predominately public. However, the government has started to have a lot of interest in Kubernetes and is receiving more education on Kubernetes and Amazon EKS. If we can have the security of Amazon EKS align with the security that is set out by the government it would be much better."
"One limitation I have found with using Amazon EKS is that there is a very big learning curve."
"Azure Red Hat OpenShift's support should be improved."
"There is room for improvement in terms of orchestration. While Azure orchestration offers valuable features, it's worth noting that it may not match the level of orchestration provided by Kubernetes itself."
"Automation could be improved."
"Technically, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is fine. However, its marketing could be improved, especially when compared to the robust marketing efforts of Azure, HPE, and Nutanix."
"The product is expensive."
"I would rate the technical support from Microsoft as six."
"I would like Azure Red Hat OpenShift to be more open to new frameworks and languages. Currently, if I create a pod with Rust, it doesn't work in OpenShift, and I must create a layer of interpretation."
"Regarding room for improvement, there's always room, but it's mainly about Azure itself rather than Azure Red Hat OpenShift. Azure is not as advanced as AWS in terms of supported services. AWS is the leader in this area. However, there's no need for service improvement in Azure Red Hat OpenShift as the service is excellent. I don't need additional features because I can customize it according to the customer's needs."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is cheaper than one of its competitors."
"Amazon EKS is very cost-effective."
"The solution is pricey. The tool's pricing is monthly."
"My company paid for the license."
"The price can be a problem for small-sized businesses."
"Amazon EKS’s pricing is ok compared to its competitors."
"The tool's pricing is good."
"The solution's pricing is fair enough and a little less costly."
"Azure Red Hat OpenShift is not a low-price solution; it's expensive. Pricing depends on the strategy and whether you buy it directly from Red Hat or the Azure portal. Additionally, some customers may need a complete disaster recovery solution, which requires additional licensing and software products for implementation, such as backups."
"It is expensive compared to a similar product."
"Compared to other cloud environments like Amazon or Google, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is an expensive solution."
"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Management solutions are best for your needs.
891,869 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business35
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise48
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon EKS?
Pricing for Amazon EKS is quite good, because you can choose the instances which are running under the hood. If you wanted to use smaller machine types, you can control your cost quite well. You ar...
What needs improvement with Amazon EKS?
One limitation I have found with using Amazon EKS is that there is a very big learning curve. It is very complicated to use the tool. I have used Google's GKE which offers an easier framework becau...
What advice do you have for others considering Amazon EKS?
Overall, Amazon EKS is a very good tool to use and it is commonly used in the industry. However, GKE is easier to use and some of the management is abstracted away, which is not the case with Amazo...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
The pricing for OpenShift is similar to other solutions like Docker ( /products/docker-37146-reviews ) Studio. The plans with ARO and AWS are standard in the market. However, using OpenShift on-pre...
What needs improvement with Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
A potential area for improvement for Azure Red Hat OpenShift is to see managed identity support and ensure that some of the security features are not conflicting with Azure or Azure product feature...
What is your primary use case for Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
My use case for Azure Red Hat OpenShift is for an employee engagement application and HR, and I have also used it for an agentic bot.
 

Also Known As

Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

GoDaddy, Pearson, FICO, Intuit, Verizon, Honeywell, Logicworks, RetailMeNot, LogMeIn, Conde Nast, mercari, Trainline, Axway
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Red Hat, Kubernetes and others in Container Management. Updated: April 2026.
891,869 professionals have used our research since 2012.