IronWorker vs. Google Cloud Run
vs
Overview
- Architecture: IronWorker is an on-demand async task processing tool for container-based workloads. Google Cloud Run lets you run stateless containers that are called upon from HTTP requests. IronWorker relies on the Docker container format. Google Cloud relies on Knative, based on the Kubernetes container format.
- Price: IronWorker starts from $24 per month. Google Cloud Run has a more complicated pricing structure, where you pay for the resources you use. (However, there are free monthly quotas). With Google Cloud Run, you only pay when functions are running. You won't pay for jobs after functions have finished executing.
- Reviews: IronWorker has an average rating of 4.6/5 on the review website G2.com. Google Cloud Run has a lower user score than IronWorker (4.4/5).
Businesses require apps to function correctly in various computing environments. Containers make this happen by packaging up an app's dependencies and code for better performance. Now some technologies combine containers and server-less computing, where users don't have to worry about purchasing or renting servers to run their apps on.
IronWorker and Google Cloud Run both exist in a server-less environment, making container management so much easier. But what are the differences between these two tools? And how do they compare in price, features, and capabilities? This review compares IronWorker vs. Google Cloud Run.
Schedule tasks and manage containers
IronWorker streamlines container management and processes tasks at specific times based on your requirements.
Comparing IronWorker vs. Google Cloud Run
Details
IronWorker and Google Cloud Run have a lot of similarities:
- Both are server-less.
- Both use the cloud.
- Both scale easily.
- Both work with any programming language.
But there are many differences:
- IronWorker is an async task processing tool that isolates an app's dependencies and code for on-demand processing. It's built on the Docker container format.
- Google Cloud Run lets you run stateless containers called upon by HTTP requests. It's built on Knavtive, based on the Kubernetes container format.
Capabilities
One of the biggest differences between IronWorker and Google Cloud Run pertains to scheduling and message queues. On IronWorker, you can schedule jobs on-demand for any time and frequency you like. (Schedule jobs to run five times a day, five times a week, five times a month, you name it.) On Google Cloud Run, you have to schedule tasks on a separate tool in the Google ecosystem called Cloud Scheduler.
Experience
Google Cloud Run is a much newer tool that IronWorker. It launched in 2019, so, at the time of writing, it's just over 18 months old. IronWorker dates back to 2010 and has been offering task processing and message queue solutions for more than a decade.
IronWorker also offers on-premise installation.
Popularity
Companies like CNN use IronWorker (and its sister platform IronMQ, a powerful message queue service) to generate news for people worldwide. We can't find any examples of companies that specifically use Google Cloud Run, but HSBC, HTC, Coca Cola, and many others use Google Cloud products such as Compute Engine and App Engine.
IronWorker vs. Google Cloud Run: Pricing
IronWorker prices start from $24 per month for its Hobby package that suits small workloads. Its Launch package for growing businesses normally costs $164.99 per month, while the high-performance Pro package normally costs $1,098.99 per month. There is an Enterprise package for mission-critical applications. (Email IronWorker for prices.) There is also a free 14-day trial.
As we mentioned earlier, Google Cloud Run prices are far more complicated. You only pay for the resources you use (up to the nearest 0.1 seconds). You get free monthly quotas and then pay for CPU, memory, requests, and networking once you exceed these quotas. It all depends on your business requirements, of course, but this pay-as-you-go model could work out very expensive.
IronWorker on-demand async task processing tool
Speak to us to learn more about scheduling and message queues.
Thanks for subscribing! Please check your email for further instructions.
IronWorker vs. Google Cloud Run: Reviews
What do users think about IronWorker vs. Google Cloud Run?
IronWorker Reviews
IronWorker has an average score of 4.6/5 on G2.com, based on 10 user reviews. (Correct as of December 2020.)
One user says:
"The message queue is awesome. It is so fast and efficient! IronWorker's on-premise solution is perfect for our needs. Where compliance and security is paramount, the on-premise install is key."
Another user says:
"My experience with the message queues was a good one. I had no issues and found the message queues to be very reliable."
Google Cloud Run Reviews
Google Cloud Run has an average score of 4.4/5 on G2, based on 4 reviews. (Correct as of December 2020.)
One user says:
"The first tool I know that works with containers server-less. It's very simple to deploy and get your applications running."
Conclusion
IronWorker and Google Cloud Run handle server-less containers in different ways. These tools also have different pricing models and scheduling capabilities. While Google is the bigger name, IronWorker has been around for longer than Google Cloud Run.
If you are still not sure about which of these tools to incorporate into your business, you could try IronWorker's free 14-day trial before making a final decision. It doesn't require a credit card. Click here to start your trial.
Unlock the Cloud with Iron.io
Find out how IronWorker can help your application obtain the cloud with fanatical customer support, reliable performance, and competitive pricing.