rsync.net vs Amazon S3
A detailed comparison to help you choose between rsync.net and Amazon S3.
Quick Verdict
4.0/5
rsync.net
0 reviews
4.1/5
Amazon S3
0 reviews
Amazon S3 is rated higher (4.1 vs 4.0). rsync.net provides SSH-accessible cloud storage for backups via rsync, BorgBackup, Restic, and rclone. Simple pricing per GB. US and EU storage. Trusted by the open source backup community since 2001. AWS S3 stores and retrieves unlimited amounts of data via a simple web interface. Built for developers, enterprises, and anyone needing reliable, durable cloud storage with pay-as-you-go pricing.
rsync.net Off-site storage for rsync, borg, and rclone |  Amazon S3 Scalable object storage for any data size or type | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 4.0 (0 reviews) | 4.1 (0 reviews)✓ |
| Pricing model | usage-based | pay-as-you-go (per GB-month + per 1,000 requests + retrieval/transfer) |
| Starting price | From $12/mo | From $0.023/mo✓ |
| Best for | Sysadmins who want SSH-native off-site backup storage with immutable snapshots, honest per-GB pricing, and humans on the support line. | Teams building on AWS who need durable, API-stable object storage for backups, data lakes, static content and archives — and who value tooling compatibility over the lowest per-GB rate |
| Features | ||
| IPv6 | ||
| DDoS protection | ✓ | |
| Automated backups | ||
| Snapshots | ✓ | |
| Managed option | ||
| Bare metal | ||
| GPU available | ||
| S3-compatible | ||
| Hourly billing | ||
| Free tier | ✓ | |
| Data-center locations | ||
| Regions | Fremont, CA; Denver, CO; Zurich, Switzerland; Tseung Kwan O, Hong Kong | 39 AWS regions / 123-124 AZs |
| Tags | ||
| Tags | eu datacenterus datacenter | free tiers3 compatibleapi accessus datacentereu datacenterapac datacenterterraform provider |
| Visit rsync.net → | Visit Amazon S3 → | |
rsync.net
Pros
- + Plain SSH-reachable UNIX filesystem: works with rsync, Borg, Restic, rclone, git-annex
- + Immutable ZFS snapshots on every standard account — strong ransomware protection
- + No egress charges, no contracts, and per-GB pricing that falls with volume
- + Own infrastructure in four locations (Fremont, Denver, Zurich, Hong Kong) with free account migration
- + Unlimited email and phone support from real engineers at every account size
Cons
- - No web UI — account management is email-based and the product is command-line only
- - 800 GB minimum on standard accounts; no free tier
- - Per-terabyte cost is higher than B2-class object storage for cold archives
- - No contractual uptime SLA published (resiliency claims are statistics, not commitments)
- - Bring your own backup tool, scheduling, and monitoring
Amazon S3
Pros
- + Designed for 11 nines durability with cross-AZ replication by default and strong read-after-write consistency
- + The S3 API is the industry standard — code written in 2006 still works, and third-party compatibility is everywhere
- + 23x cost ladder from Standard down to Glacier Deep Archive at $0.00099/GB-month, with lifecycle automation
- + Deepest storage feature set available: versioning, Object Lock, replication, inventory, event notifications, access management
Cons
- - Egress at $0.09/GB and per-request pricing produce surprise bills for chatty or restore-heavy workloads
- - IA and Glacier classes add retrieval fees and latency — the restore path must be priced separately
- - Policy configuration (bucket policies, IAM, Block Public Access, KMS keys) is complex and historically error-prone
- - SLA (99.9%/99.0%) is far below the durability figure — availability and durability are different promises
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new hosting and infrastructure providers, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.