Is Amazon RDS cheaper than Supabase?
Short answer: it depends on your workload. Amazon RDS bills around the clock; Supabase bills around the clock. The two cases below flip the answer.
Amazon RDS: Managed Postgres on AWS, billed around the clock per instance. It bills per instance-hour, 24/7, no scale-to-zero.
Supabase: Postgres plus a backend (auth, storage, realtime), always on. It bills $25/mo Pro floor, then compute add-ons and usage.
So Amazon RDS is cheaper than Supabase for bursty or idle databases, and more expensive for the other. Your real answer depends on your compute size, how many hours a day the database is active, and your storage.
Run your exact numbers
Move the sliders for your workload and see Amazon RDS, Supabase, and the others side by side.
Open the comparatorIs Amazon RDS cheaper than Supabase?
It depends on your workload. For a bursty or idle database, Amazon RDS is usually cheaper (about $47.87 vs $85.25 in our reference case). For a steady, always-on database, Amazon RDS comes out ahead. Run your own numbers in the comparator.
What decides which is cheaper?
Mostly whether your database can idle. Amazon RDS bills around the clock; Supabase bills around the clock. Compute size and storage matter too.
Whichever you pick, FluentDB is the Mac client for it.
Download FluentDB for Mac