Filebase vs Google Cloud Storage
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Filebase and Google Cloud Storage.
Quick Verdict
3.5/5
Filebase
0 reviews
4.0/5
Google Cloud Storage
0 reviews
Google Cloud Storage is rated higher (4.0 vs 3.5). Filebase provides S3-compatible API over decentralized storage networks (IPFS, Sia, Storj). Redundancy through multiple blockchains. US-based with competitive pricing. Cloud object storage service for storing and retrieving unstructured data at scale. For developers, data engineers, and enterprises managing backups, archives, and analytics workloads.
Filebase S3-compatible object storage with Web3 integration and multi-cloud redundancy | Google Cloud Storage Scalable object storage for any data type, integrated with Google Cloud | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 3.5 (0 reviews) | 4.0 (0 reviews)✓ |
| Pricing model | freemium | pay-as-you-go |
| Starting price | Free tier available | Free tier available |
| Best for | Cost-conscious teams needing S3-compatible object storage with heavy read traffic and free egress, plus Web3 projects wanting IPFS pinning and content addressing without managing gateways | Teams already building on Google Cloud — BigQuery, Dataflow, Vertex AI — and cold backup/archive workloads that value the cheap Nearline, Coldline, and Archive classes. |
| Features | ||
| IPv6 | ||
| DDoS protection | ||
| Automated backups | ||
| Snapshots | ||
| Managed option | ||
| Bare metal | ||
| GPU available | ||
| S3-compatible | ||
| Hourly billing | ✓ | |
| Free tier | ||
| Tags | ||
| Tags | free tiers3 compatibleus datacenterapi access | free tiers3 compatibleapi accesseu datacenterus datacenterapac datacenterterraform provider |
| Visit Filebase → | Visit Google Cloud Storage → | |
Filebase
Pros
- + Genuine S3 API compatibility (SigV4, AWS SDKs) — migrate in and out without re-architecting
- + Excellent price story: $0.015 per GB-month, free object egress on paid plans with no cap, free inbound and deletes
- + Straightforward plans: free 5 GB tier without a credit card, Pro at $7.50/month for 500 GB
- + IPFS integration done for you: pinning, per-bucket CIDs, gateways, IPNS names and static sites
- + Billing documentation is unusually explicit about what is metered and what is not
Cons
- - Vendor-stated 99% uptime and no public SLA — a procurement problem for regulated workloads
- - Very small company (single-digit headcount) running production storage infrastructure
- - IPFS bandwidth is billed separately: gateway, bitswap and Sites traffic can surprise you
- - No published datacenter locations or data residency guarantees
- - Limited platform beyond storage: no compute, no databases; older pages still describe tiers that no longer exist
Google Cloud Storage
Pros
- + Per-GiB-hour pricing published per class and location, prorated per second — no commitment required
- + Four storage classes put cold bytes as low as about $0.0012/GB-month (Archive)
- + Credit-backed SLA: 99.95% multi/dual-region Standard with 10–50% credits on miss
- + Real S3 interoperability (XML API, HMAC keys, V4 signing) plus a documented migration path
- + Always Free tier (5 GB-months, 50k Class B ops, 100 GB egress in US regions) can host a small real workload
Cons
- - Egress at $0.12/GiB (Premium) makes read-heavy serving expensive without a CDN in front
- - Cold classes carry minimum storage durations and retrieval fees — wrong class choices cost more than Standard
- - Many pricing dimensions (classes, placement, network tiers, operation classes) make forecasting hard
- - IAM and lifecycle configuration is a real learning curve and a common source of misconfiguration
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new hosting and infrastructure providers, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.