Databases · head to head
Amazon Aurora vs DynamoDB

Amazon Aurora
Databases
MySQL and PostgreSQL-compatible relational database built for the cloud
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -

DynamoDB
Databases
AWS-only managed key-value and document database with fixed per-partition throughput limits and no ad hoc queries.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Amazon Aurora aurora requires AWS ecosystem knowledge and integration with other AWS services; DynamoDB access patterns must be designed into the key schema before launch; a query nobody anticipated needs a new global secondary index, which is a full extra copy of the projected attributes billed as storage and as writes, or an offline migration.
- They diverge on capability: Amazon Aurora covers MySQL/PostgreSQL Compatible, DynamoDB covers Managed and serverless.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Amazon Aurora and DynamoDB actually diverge.
| Attribute | Amazon Aurora | DynamoDB |
|---|---|---|
| Platforms | AWS Cloud | AWS |
Identical on both: starting price (Free), pricing model (usage-based), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Databases), founded (2006).
What each one covers
Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.
Only in Amazon Aurora
- MySQL/PostgreSQL Compatible
- 5x MySQL Performance
- Auto-scaling Storage
- Global Database
- Serverless v2
- Multi-master
- Fault Tolerant
- AWS Lambda
Only in DynamoDB
- Managed and serverless
- Predictable latency
- On-demand or provisioned capacity
- Global secondary indexes
- Transactions
- DynamoDB Streams
- Global tables
- Point-in-time recovery
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Amazon Aurora
- Transaction processingnot DynamoDB
- Data storagenot DynamoDB
- Application backendnot DynamoDB
- Reportingnot DynamoDB
- Data analyticsnot DynamoDB
DynamoDB
- High-volume keyed workloads such as sessions, shopping carts, device state or user profiles where the access pattern is fixed and knownnot Amazon Aurora
- Traffic that spikes unpredictably, where on-demand capacity absorbs a burst without a capacity-planning exercisenot Amazon Aurora
- Serverless applications on Lambda, where an HTTP-based datastore avoids the connection pooling problem relational databases havenot Amazon Aurora
- Event or telemetry ingestion where writes vastly outnumber reads and each record is retrieved by a known identifiernot Amazon Aurora
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Amazon Aurora
- Aurora requires AWS ecosystem knowledge and integration with other AWS services
- Pricing can become expensive with high-traffic applications using many read replicas
- Limited support for non-relational data types compared to NoSQL alternatives
DynamoDB
- Access patterns must be designed into the key schema before launch; a query nobody anticipated needs a new global secondary index, which is a full extra copy of the projected attributes billed as storage and as writes, or an offline migration.
- Global secondary indexes are eventually consistent and cannot be read strongly, so a read-after-write against an index can legitimately miss the item that was just written, and application code must be written to tolerate that.
- Per-partition throughput is capped at roughly 3,000 read and 1,000 write units, so a hot key throttles even when the table has spare capacity overall, and the only real fix is changing the key design to spread the load.
- Items are limited to 400 KB and query results paginate at 1 MB, so large or list-shaped data has to be split, offloaded to S3 with a pointer, or read through pagination loops that complicate every consumer.
- It runs only on AWS and the API is proprietary rather than a standard, so moving the data layer means rewriting it; ScyllaDB's Alternator is the only meaningfully compatible target and it brings a much smaller ecosystem.
Pricing, plan by plan
Amazon Aurora
Free- Serverless v2$0.12/hour
- Auto-scaling
- Pay per ACU
- Instant scaling
- Provisioned$29/month
- Dedicated instances
- Predictable performance
- Reserved capacity
DynamoDB
Free- On-Demand Capacity$null/usage-based
- Pay-per-request pricing with automatic scaling
- Read: 0.5 RRU per 4 KB (eventually consistent), 1 RRU per 4 KB (strongly consistent), 2 RRU per 4 KB (transactional)
- Write: 1 WRU per 1 KB
- Provisioned Capacity$null/hourly
- Fixed hourly charges based on reserved capacity
- RCU rate: $0.00013 per hour (Standard)
- WCU rate: $0.00065 per hour (Standard)
- Standard Table Class Storage$0.25/per GB/month
- $0.25 per GB/month after free tier
- First 25 GB free per month (free tier)
- Standard-Infrequent Access Table Class$0.1/per GB/month
- $0.10 per GB/month
Which should you pick?
Choose Amazon Aurora if
- You need mysql/postgresql compatible.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on AWS Cloud.
- You also want 5x mysql performance.
Choose DynamoDB if
- You need managed and serverless.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on AWS.
- You also want predictable latency.
Questions people ask
- Is Amazon Aurora or DynamoDB better?
- Neither clearly leads. Amazon Aurora starts at Free and DynamoDB at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Amazon Aurora or DynamoDB?
- Amazon Aurora starts at Free and DynamoDB at Free.
- Does Amazon Aurora or DynamoDB run on more platforms?
- Amazon Aurora runs on AWS Cloud. DynamoDB runs on AWS.
- Can I use Amazon Aurora for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is Amazon Aurora best used for?
- Amazon Aurora is most often used for transaction processing, data storage, application backend, reporting. Of those, transaction processing and data storage are not what DynamoDB is typically brought in for.
- What can Amazon Aurora do that DynamoDB cannot?
- Amazon Aurora covers MySQL/PostgreSQL Compatible, 5x MySQL Performance, Auto-scaling Storage, Global Database. DynamoDB covers Managed and serverless, Predictable latency, On-demand or provisioned capacity, Global secondary indexes.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Amazon Aurora: Is Amazon Aurora compatible with MySQL and PostgreSQL?
Yes, Amazon Aurora offers MySQL and PostgreSQL compatibility with full compatibility to their open-source counterparts, allowing you to migrate existing databases with standard tools.
SourceDynamoDB: On-demand or provisioned capacity?
On-demand suits unpredictable or spiky traffic and removes capacity planning. Provisioned with autoscaling is considerably cheaper for steady high-volume workloads. Tables can be switched between them, though not arbitrarily often.
Amazon Aurora: What uptime SLA does Amazon Aurora provide?
Aurora is designed for up to 99.99% single-region uptime and 99.999% multi-region uptime with automatic failover.
SourceDynamoDB: Can I run DynamoDB outside AWS?
No. DynamoDB Local exists for development and testing only. For a production-compatible alternative elsewhere, ScyllaDB's Alternator implements the DynamoDB API, but it is a different system with a different ecosystem.
Amazon Aurora: How much does Amazon Aurora cost?
Aurora uses serverless, usage-based pricing where you pay only for consumed capacity. Typical pricing ranges from $50-70 per month for minimal setups to $400-600 per month for small production clusters.
SourceDynamoDB: Can I run ad hoc queries or analytics?
Not on the table itself. Scans are slow and expensive at scale. The usual pattern is to export to S3 or stream changes out and query them in Athena, Redshift or another analytical engine.
Amazon Aurora: Can Amazon Aurora scale automatically?
Yes, Aurora automatically scales to match workload demands without performance degradation, supporting both read and write scaling.
SourceDynamoDB: Is single-table design necessary?
It is the pattern that gets the most from DynamoDB when access patterns are well known, because it lets related items be retrieved in one query. It also makes the model harder to evolve, so many teams reasonably choose multiple simpler tables and accept extra requests.
Amazon Aurora: How many read replicas does Aurora support?
Aurora supports up to 15 low-latency read replicas for distributing read traffic across your application.
SourceDynamoDB: What are the real limits I should design around?
400 KB per item, 1 MB per query or scan page, 100 items per transaction, roughly 3,000 read and 1,000 write units per partition, and eventual consistency on global secondary indexes.
Related pages
More on Amazon Aurora
Other head to heads
- Amazon Aurora vs PlanetScale
- Amazon Aurora vs Firebolt
- Amazon Aurora vs FaunaDB
- Amazon Aurora vs Cockroach Labs
- Amazon Aurora vs Azure SQL
- Amazon Aurora vs DataStax
- Amazon Aurora vs ScyllaDB
- Amazon Aurora vs MariaDB
- Amazon Aurora vs Aiven
- Amazon Aurora vs Apache Druid
- Amazon Aurora vs Couchbase
- Amazon Aurora vs QuestDB
- Amazon Aurora vs Vitess
- Amazon Aurora vs BigQuery
- Amazon Aurora vs CosmosDB
- Amazon Aurora vs Microsoft SQL Server
- Amazon Aurora vs Elasticsearch
- Amazon Aurora vs Cassandra
- Amazon Aurora vs Airtable
- Amazon Aurora vs PostgreSQL
- Amazon Aurora vs Memcached
- Amazon Aurora vs dbt
- Amazon Aurora vs EMQX
- Amazon Aurora vs Firebase Realtime Database
- Amazon Aurora vs CouchDB
- DynamoDB vs PlanetScale
- DynamoDB vs Firebolt
- DynamoDB vs FaunaDB
- DynamoDB vs Cockroach Labs
- DynamoDB vs Azure SQL
- DynamoDB vs DataStax
- DynamoDB vs ScyllaDB
- DynamoDB vs MariaDB
- DynamoDB vs Aiven
- DynamoDB vs Apache Druid
- DynamoDB vs Couchbase
- DynamoDB vs QuestDB
- DynamoDB vs Vitess
- DynamoDB vs BigQuery
- DynamoDB vs CosmosDB
- DynamoDB vs Microsoft SQL Server
- DynamoDB vs Elasticsearch
- DynamoDB vs Cassandra
- DynamoDB vs Airtable
- DynamoDB vs PostgreSQL
- DynamoDB vs Memcached
- DynamoDB vs dbt
- DynamoDB vs EMQX
- DynamoDB vs Firebase Realtime Database
- DynamoDB vs CouchDB
