Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Google Cloud Storage vs Microsoft Azure File Storage comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 1, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
1.0
Google Cloud Storage is reliable and efficient but lacks cost-saving benefits compared to Azure, with favorable return on investment.
Sentiment score
2.5
Microsoft Azure File Storage offers positive ROI and ease of integration but varies based on infrastructure size and business needs.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
3.8
Google Cloud Storage's customer support is generally praised for responsiveness, though some users report slower response times and prefer forums.
Sentiment score
6.4
Customer feedback on Microsoft Azure File Storage support varies, with experiences ranging from efficient to delayed, depending on circumstances.
We have self-studied to learn the services.
For SAP loads, Google provided a specific team, which resulted in good support.
I would rate the tech support and vendor support for Microsoft Azure File Storage nine or ten out of ten.
As and when we require, they are able to provide solutions or guide us toward solutions.
Microsoft technical support is very prompt.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
5.8
Google Cloud Storage is highly scalable, allowing easy capacity adjustments and stable performance for both small and large user bases.
Sentiment score
6.5
Microsoft Azure File Storage excels in scalability, favored by various enterprises for ease of scaling and adaptability with DevOps.
Google Cloud Storage is scalable, but there are limitations.
We successfully handled a huge transaction during an iPhone launch without any issues.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.6
Google Cloud Storage is reliable and efficient, with high stability and performance ratings, maintaining data integrity globally.
Sentiment score
6.5
Microsoft Azure File Storage is stable and reliable, preferred over competitors, with minor issues in larger files and VPN connectivity.
There was no direct experience with any instability during my involvement.
I rate the stability of Microsoft Azure File Storage as a seven out of ten.
We sometimes encounter glitches with bigger files, but everything else works as expected.
 

Room For Improvement

Google Cloud Storage needs speed, cost improvements, user-friendly management, and enhanced security, integration, capacity, pricing, and data tools.
Microsoft Azure File Storage needs improvements in pricing, support, integration, usability, performance, security, and documentation for better user experience.
They cover a broad range of products, which might affect their ability to compete well in certain niches.
The information is not readily available on the internet, so we have to double-check and understand everything.
Some chunking logics need to be better to address issues with processing bigger files.
Expanding the storage capacity would be beneficial.
 

Setup Cost

Enterprise buyers find Google Cloud Storage pricing competitive, citing flexibility and moderate fees, despite occasional cost increases.
Microsoft Azure File Storage offers flexible pricing, competitive yet occasionally higher than alternatives, with varied cost opinions among users.
Google Cloud was cheaper compared to AWS and Azure.
Depending on your setup, Google Cloud Storage is economical, especially if you do not need high stability and scalability.
I would rate it three or three and a half out of ten on the pricing scale.
I would rate the pricing of Microsoft Azure File Storage seven or eight, where one is high and ten is low.
The pricing for Microsoft Azure File Storage is five out of ten, not so expensive and not so low.
 

Valuable Features

Google Cloud Storage provides scalability, strong security, seamless integration, and flexible features, making it reliable and user-friendly.
Microsoft Azure File Storage is praised for its integration, flexibility, security, speed, and seamless file access across environments.
The user interface of Google Cloud Storage is easy and consistent across all their products.
We do not experience any disruptions, and the service meets our needs and requirements.
Scalability in Microsoft Azure File Storage is impressive.
The storage solution saves time and makes document processing seamless.
It is satisfying our requirements with encryption and security features in place.
 

Categories and Ranking

Google Cloud Storage
Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
79
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Storage (2nd)
Microsoft Azure File Storage
Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
52
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Public Cloud Storage Services category, the mindshare of Google Cloud Storage is 8.3%, down from 11.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Azure File Storage is 9.6%, down from 13.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Public Cloud Storage Services Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Google Cloud Storage8.3%
Microsoft Azure File Storage9.6%
Other82.1%
Public Cloud Storage Services
 

Featured Reviews

Manimaran Tannimalai - PeerSpot reviewer
User interface consistency facilitates seamless project planning and design for specialized tasks
While Google has made efforts to address SAP loads, the company lacks a product specialist focus. They cover a broad range of products, which might affect their ability to compete well in certain niches. Google's strength lies in their adapted approach to specific tasks, as seen with SAP loads. Generally, their focus is widespread.
Karthik-A - PeerSpot reviewer
Has simplified customer data management and improved file transfer workflows
We are using AWS as well, and the main difference is that Microsoft Azure File Storage is more user-friendly for configuration-related and admin-related activities. We do not have to perform many complex activities, making it simpler compared to AWS. Security-wise, there are some concerns because it is in the cloud. The customers need to double-check, and they are not giving complete approval when it comes to security. I would rate Microsoft Azure File Storage's security compliance features seven or eight out of ten. It is secure, but since it is in the cloud, we have to convince customers when providing solutions. Many questions were raised while providing the architecture and solution for this file transfer management system. We convinced them because we have the feature and showed a demo, but it is still a prototype. We have to get approval before starting the work. The data redundancy options in Microsoft Azure File Storage are good. I am facing some challenges in convincing customers, and additional information would be helpful to address these challenges. Microsoft Azure File Storage saves time compared to AWS. We tried the prototype in AWS as well, but Azure is easier. Regarding cost, it is slightly less compared to AWS. The functionality of Microsoft Azure File Storage does not pose any issues, though basic users find it complex and require training. Regarding stability, I would rate Microsoft Azure File Storage 8.5 to 9. Scalability in Microsoft Azure File Storage is impressive. We recently handled a huge transaction during an iPhone launch without any problems.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Public Cloud Storage Services solutions are best for your needs.
869,883 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business31
Midsize Enterprise17
Large Enterprise34
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise24
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google Cloud Storage?
Google Cloud ( /products/google-cloud-reviews ) was cheaper compared to AWS ( /products/amazon-aws-reviews ) and Azure ( /products/microsoft-azure-reviews ). AWS ( /products/amazon-aws-reviews ) wa...
What needs improvement with Google Cloud Storage?
It took only five minutes to get everything working with Google Cloud Storage, so it was easy. For Google Cloud Storage, it's actually not with Google Cloud Storage specifically, but with Google Cl...
Which file storage system is better - Amazon EFS (elastic file storage) or Azure File Storage?
Amazon EFS is easy to set up: you can use the AWS management console, API, or command-line. Amazon EFS can grow to petabytes and deliver consistent low latencies and high levels of throughput. This...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Azure File Storage?
The pricing for Microsoft Azure File Storage is five out of ten, not so expensive and not so low.
 

Also Known As

No data available
MS Azure File Storage
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

1. Adobe 2. Airbnb 3. Amazon 4. Apple 5. AT&T 6. Baidu 7. Cisco 8. Coca-Cola 9. Dell 10. eBay 11. Facebook 12. Ford 13. Google 13. HP 14. IBM 15. Intel 16. JPMorgan Chase 17. LinkedIn 18. Lyft 19. Microsoft 20. Netflix 21. Nike 22. Oracle 23. PayPal 24. Pinterest 25. Qualcomm 26. SAP 27. Spotify 28. Tesla 29. Toyota 30. Twitter 31. Visa 32. Walmart 33. WeWork
Talon, Camden
Find out what your peers are saying about Google Cloud Storage vs. Microsoft Azure File Storage and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,883 professionals have used our research since 2012.