AWS vs Supabase

• AWS RDS entry-level configurations for Postgres start at $11.68/mo for 1 GB of RAM, whereas Supabase offers a free tier starting at $0.00/mo with 0.5 GB of RAM.
• Scaling to high-end enterprise workloads sees Supabase climb to $7460.00/mo for 256 GB of RAM, while AWS RDS stays in a lower cost bracket for basic 8 GB configurations at 116.07/mo.
• Storage overages are nearly identical, with AWS charging $0.12/GB and Supabase charging $0.13/GB for excess capacity.
• Network egress rates remain stable across both platforms, both hitting $0.09/GB for traffic exceeding the bundled limits.

AWS RDS operates on a predictable, granular model that relies on underlying EC2 instances, often running on older generation hardware unless you specifically provision newer Graviton or Intel-based nodes. It provides a stable baseline for teams who need to manage their own connection pooling and fine-tune IOPS via Provisioned IOPS volumes. Because AWS separates the compute and storage costs, the pricing is less volatile for predictable, static workloads compared to the bundled approach found in Supabase.

Supabase provides a significantly wider spectrum for scaling, moving from tiny hobbyist projects up to massive instances with 128 vCPU cores. While AWS RDS is the industry standard for traditional enterprise setups that require tight control over replication and regional failover, Supabase simplifies the management of the database layer for teams that want to avoid the complexities of VPC networking and manual instance tuning. If you are building a standard CRUD application and want to avoid the configuration overhead of AWS, Supabase is the cheaper entry point, though the monthly cost grows rapidly once you exceed the 8 GB disk storage ceiling included in their higher tiers. AWS remains the preferred choice for those who already have their network infrastructure inside an existing private cloud ecosystem.