Softwr

Databases · head to head

Dgraph vs DynamoDB

Dgraph logo

Dgraph

Databases

Apache 2.0 distributed graph database written in Go, maintained by Hypermode, queried through GraphQL or its own DQL language.

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
DynamoDB logo

DynamoDB

Databases

AWS-only managed key-value and document database with fixed per-partition throughput limits and no ad hoc queries.

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Dgraph sharding is by predicate, so a single very hot predicate lives entirely in one Raft group and cannot be split further; adding nodes does not relieve it and the fix is a data model change.; 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: Dgraph covers Apache 2.0 licence, DynamoDB covers Managed and serverless.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Dgraph and DynamoDB actually diverge.

Attributes where Dgraph and DynamoDB differ
AttributeDgraphDynamoDB
Pricing modelfreemiumusage-based
PlatformsLinux, Mac, Docker, WebAWS
Founded20162006

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Databases).

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 Dgraph

  • Apache 2.0 licence
  • Generated GraphQL API
  • DQL query language
  • Predicate sharding
  • Raft replication
  • Distributed ACID transactions
  • Written in Go
  • Full-text and geo indexing

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.

Dgraph

  • An application whose core data is a graph, such as permissions, social connections or product relationships, where the frontend already consumes GraphQLnot DynamoDB
  • A knowledge graph that outgrew a single machine and needs storage distributed across nodes without a per-core licence negotiationnot DynamoDB
  • Recommendation or fraud-detection features that traverse several hops at request time, where a relational join chain has become the bottlenecknot DynamoDB
  • Teams that want a graph database they can read, fork and self-host under a permissive licence rather than a source-available onenot DynamoDB

DynamoDB

  • High-volume keyed workloads such as sessions, shopping carts, device state or user profiles where the access pattern is fixed and knownnot Dgraph
  • Traffic that spikes unpredictably, where on-demand capacity absorbs a burst without a capacity-planning exercisenot Dgraph
  • Serverless applications on Lambda, where an HTTP-based datastore avoids the connection pooling problem relational databases havenot Dgraph
  • Event or telemetry ingestion where writes vastly outnumber reads and each record is retrieved by a known identifiernot Dgraph

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Dgraph

  • Sharding is by predicate, so a single very hot predicate lives entirely in one Raft group and cannot be split further; adding nodes does not relieve it and the fix is a data model change.
  • Stewardship passed from Dgraph Labs to Hypermode after the original company stopped operating independently, so anyone building on it is betting on a second custodian rather than on the original team's roadmap.
  • The GraphQL layer is generated and opinionated, so anything it does not express drops you into DQL, which is a second language your team must learn and which no other database speaks.
  • The community is a fraction of Neo4j's, so operational answers, tuning experience, hiring and third-party tooling are all thinner, and unusual failure modes in a Zero and Alpha cluster leave you reading source rather than a forum.
  • There is no portable graph standard to migrate to; Cypher, Gremlin and SPARQL are all different query models, so the schema and every query is a rewrite if you later leave, and that cost grows with the application.

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

Dgraph

Free
  • CommunityFree
    • Native GraphQL
    • Graph queries
    • Full-text search
  • Cloud$39/month
    • Managed service
    • Auto-scaling
    • Enterprise support

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 Dgraph if

  • You need apache 2.0 licence.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Mac, Docker, Web.
  • You also want generated graphql api.
Dgraph review

Choose DynamoDB if

  • You need managed and serverless.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on AWS.
  • You also want predictable latency.
DynamoDB review

Questions people ask

Is Dgraph or DynamoDB better?
Neither clearly leads. Dgraph 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, Dgraph or DynamoDB?
Dgraph starts at Free and DynamoDB at Free.
Does Dgraph or DynamoDB run on more platforms?
Dgraph runs on Linux, Mac, Docker, Web. DynamoDB runs on AWS.
Can I use Dgraph for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Dgraph best used for?
Dgraph is most often used for an application whose core data is a graph, such as permissions, social connections or product relationships, where the frontend already consumes graphql, a knowledge graph that outgrew a single machine and needs storage distributed across nodes without a per-core licence negotiation, recommendation or fraud-detection features that traverse several hops at request time, where a relational join chain has become the bottleneck, teams that want a graph database they can read, fork and self-host under a permissive licence rather than a source-available one. Of those, an application whose core data is a graph, such as permissions, social connections or product relationships, where the frontend already consumes graphql and a knowledge graph that outgrew a single machine and needs storage distributed across nodes without a per-core licence negotiation are not what DynamoDB is typically brought in for.
What can Dgraph do that DynamoDB cannot?
Dgraph covers Apache 2.0 licence, Generated GraphQL API, DQL query language, Predicate sharding. DynamoDB covers Managed and serverless, Predictable latency, On-demand or provisioned capacity, Global secondary indexes.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Dgraph: Is Dgraph open source?

Yes. The current repository is Apache 2.0, which is a permissive OSI licence, and the project is at v25 under Hypermode's maintenance.

DynamoDB: 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.

Dgraph: Is it really GraphQL?

It serves a generated GraphQL API, which is real GraphQL for clients. Its native language, DQL, resembles GraphQL syntactically but is Dgraph's own language and is not the GraphQL specification.

DynamoDB: 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.

Dgraph: How does it compare to Neo4j?

Neo4j has the larger ecosystem, Cypher, and far more operational precedent. Dgraph distributes storage across nodes by default and gives you a GraphQL endpoint without writing resolvers. The choice usually turns on whether you need horizontal scale and a GraphQL surface more than you need ecosystem depth.

DynamoDB: 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.

Dgraph: What does a production cluster look like?

At minimum a set of Zero nodes for coordination and a replicated set of Alpha nodes for data, typically three of each for fault tolerance, which is a meaningfully larger operational footprint than a single graph server.

DynamoDB: 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.

Dgraph: Who maintains it now?

Hypermode. Dgraph Labs, the original company, no longer operates it, and that change of custodian is the main non-technical risk to weigh.

DynamoDB: 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.

Share

Related pages

More on Dgraph

More on DynamoDB

Keep looking

Other head to heads