Amazon S3 vs rsync.net
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Amazon S3 and rsync.net.
 Amazon S3 Scalable object storage for any data size or type | rsync.net Off-site storage for rsync, borg, and rclone | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 4.2 (198 reviews) | 4.6 (343 reviews)✓ |
| Pricing model | freemium | paid |
| Starting price | Free tier available✓ | From €8/mo |
| Best for | Teams building on AWS who need reliable, scalable object storage for backups, data lakes, static content, or application data. | Linux and BSD sysadmins wanting SSH-accessible off-site backup storage from a long-trusted provider |
| Tags | ||
| Tags | free tiers3 compatibleapi accessus datacentereu datacenterapac datacenterterraform provider | eu datacenterus datacenter |
| Visit Amazon S3 → | Visit rsync.net → | |
Amazon S3
Pros
- + Store unlimited data with predictable per-GB pricing
- + Achieve 99.999999999% durability through automatic redundancy
- + Integrate directly with EC2, Lambda, RDS, and other AWS tools
- + Use lifecycle rules to automatically move data to cheaper storage tiers
- + Control access granularly with IAM policies and bucket policies
Cons
- - Data transfer out of AWS incurs egress charges that can add up quickly
- - API requests have per-1000-request pricing; high-frequency access patterns get costly
- - Requires AWS account setup and understanding of bucket configuration for security
rsync.net
Pros
- + SSH access for rsync, borg, rclone, and more
- + Trusted since 2001
- + EU and US storage options
Cons
- - No web UI — command-line only
- - More expensive per GB than Backblaze B2
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new AI tools, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.