Databases · head to head
DynamoDB vs PlanetScale

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: 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.; PlanetScale pricing varies significantly across 17+ AWS and GCP regions
- They diverge on capability: DynamoDB covers Managed and serverless, PlanetScale covers Database Branching.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which DynamoDB and PlanetScale actually diverge.
| Attribute | DynamoDB | PlanetScale |
|---|---|---|
| Platforms | AWS | Cloud-hosted (AWS, GCP, Azure) |
| Founded | 2006 | 2018 |
Identical on both: starting price (Free), pricing model (usage-based), 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 DynamoDB
- Managed and serverless
- Predictable latency
- On-demand or provisioned capacity
- Global secondary indexes
- Transactions
- DynamoDB Streams
- Global tables
- Point-in-time recovery
Only in PlanetScale
- Database Branching
- Non-blocking Schema Changes
- Insights
- Horizontal Scaling
- Connection Pooling
- Query Caching
- Automatic Backups
- Global Replication
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
DynamoDB
- High-volume keyed workloads such as sessions, shopping carts, device state or user profiles where the access pattern is fixed and knownnot PlanetScale
- Traffic that spikes unpredictably, where on-demand capacity absorbs a burst without a capacity-planning exercisenot PlanetScale
- Serverless applications on Lambda, where an HTTP-based datastore avoids the connection pooling problem relational databases havenot PlanetScale
- Event or telemetry ingestion where writes vastly outnumber reads and each record is retrieved by a known identifiernot PlanetScale
PlanetScale
- MySQL-compatible applications requiring horizontal scalingnot DynamoDB
- PostgreSQL deployments with custom cluster configurationsnot DynamoDB
- Multi-region database deployments on AWS or GCPnot DynamoDB
- Applications requiring transparent sharding via Vitessnot DynamoDB
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
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.
PlanetScale
- Pricing varies significantly across 17+ AWS and GCP regions
- Additional costs for EBS storage beyond base tier, backup storage, and egress
- Dedicated PgBouncer and replicas incur separate charges
- Metal tier pricing increases sharply with larger configurations
Pricing, plan by plan
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
PlanetScale
Free- Postgres EBS Single-Node (ARM64 PS-5)$5/month
- 512 MiB RAM
- Single-node configuration
- EBS storage included
- Postgres EBS HA (ARM64 PS-5)$15/month
- 512 MiB RAM
- 3-node high-availability setup
- 1 primary + 2 replicas
- Postgres Metal (M-10)$50/month
- 1/8 vCPU, 1 GiB RAM
- 3-node HA configuration
- 10 GiB NVMe storage included
- Vitess Non-Metal 3-Node$39/month
- Sharding-capable database
- x86-64 architecture
- 3-node configuration
Which should you pick?
Choose DynamoDB if
- You need managed and serverless.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on AWS.
- You also want predictable latency.
Choose PlanetScale if
- You need database branching.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Cloud-hosted (AWS, GCP, Azure).
- You also want non-blocking schema changes.
Questions people ask
- Is DynamoDB or PlanetScale better?
- Neither clearly leads. DynamoDB starts at Free and PlanetScale at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, DynamoDB or PlanetScale?
- DynamoDB starts at Free and PlanetScale at Free.
- Does DynamoDB or PlanetScale run on more platforms?
- DynamoDB runs on AWS. PlanetScale runs on Cloud-hosted (AWS, GCP, Azure).
- Can I use DynamoDB for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is DynamoDB best used for?
- DynamoDB is most often used for high-volume keyed workloads such as sessions, shopping carts, device state or user profiles where the access pattern is fixed and known, traffic that spikes unpredictably, where on-demand capacity absorbs a burst without a capacity-planning exercise, serverless applications on lambda, where an http-based datastore avoids the connection pooling problem relational databases have, event or telemetry ingestion where writes vastly outnumber reads and each record is retrieved by a known identifier. Of those, high-volume keyed workloads such as sessions, shopping carts, device state or user profiles where the access pattern is fixed and known and traffic that spikes unpredictably, where on-demand capacity absorbs a burst without a capacity-planning exercise are not what PlanetScale is typically brought in for.
- What can DynamoDB do that PlanetScale cannot?
- DynamoDB covers Managed and serverless, Predictable latency, On-demand or provisioned capacity, Global secondary indexes. PlanetScale covers Database Branching, Non-blocking Schema Changes, Insights, Horizontal Scaling.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
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.
PlanetScale: How much does a PlanetScale Postgres database cost per month?
PlanetScale Postgres pricing starts at $5/month for single-node ARM64 configurations with 512 MiB RAM and $15/month for the same specs in high-availability mode with 1 primary and 2 replicas. Metal tier starts at $50/month for M-10 configuration (1/8 vCPU, 1 GiB RAM). Exact pricing depends on cluster size, node architecture (ARM64 vs x86-64), storage configuration, and selected AWS/GCP region.
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.
PlanetScale: Is there a free tier for PlanetScale?
PlanetScale offers a free tier for development and testing workloads. After free tier limits are reached, usage-based pricing applies starting at $5/month for the smallest Postgres single-node configuration, with costs scaling based on cluster size, compute, storage, and additional features like dedicated PgBouncer or replicas.
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.
PlanetScale: What is the difference between PlanetScale ARM64 and x86-64 pricing?
ARM64 instances cost significantly less than x86-64 equivalents. For example, a Postgres EBS HA cluster with 512 MiB RAM costs $15/month on ARM64 but $39/month on x86-64. This pricing difference extends across all cluster sizes, with larger x86-64 configurations reaching up to $5,599/month compared to ARM64 alternatives.
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.
PlanetScale: What is included in a PlanetScale cluster price versus additional costs?
The advertised cluster price covers the base compute and configured storage. Additional charges apply for EBS storage beyond the base allocation, backup storage, data egress, optional dedicated PgBouncer connections, and replicas beyond the base high-availability configuration. Regional pricing varies across 17+ AWS and GCP zones.
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 PlanetScale
Other head to heads
- DynamoDB vs Elasticsearch
- DynamoDB vs Cassandra
- DynamoDB vs Cockroach Labs
- DynamoDB vs Airtable
- DynamoDB vs PostgreSQL
- DynamoDB vs BigQuery
- DynamoDB vs FaunaDB
- DynamoDB vs Memcached
- DynamoDB vs ScyllaDB
- DynamoDB vs Couchbase
- DynamoDB vs CosmosDB
- DynamoDB vs DataStax
- DynamoDB vs dbt
- DynamoDB vs EMQX
- DynamoDB vs Firebase Realtime Database
- DynamoDB vs CouchDB
- DynamoDB vs Amazon Aurora
- DynamoDB vs Nile
- DynamoDB vs MotherDuck
- DynamoDB vs DataGrip
- DynamoDB vs TiDB
- DynamoDB vs Readyset
- DynamoDB vs IBM Db2
- DynamoDB vs Instaclustr
- DynamoDB vs Knack
- DynamoDB vs LanceDB
- DynamoDB vs Marqo
- PlanetScale vs Elasticsearch
- PlanetScale vs Cassandra
- PlanetScale vs Cockroach Labs
- PlanetScale vs Airtable
- PlanetScale vs PostgreSQL
- PlanetScale vs BigQuery
- PlanetScale vs FaunaDB
- PlanetScale vs Memcached
- PlanetScale vs ScyllaDB
- PlanetScale vs Couchbase
- PlanetScale vs CosmosDB
- PlanetScale vs DataStax
- PlanetScale vs dbt
- PlanetScale vs EMQX
- PlanetScale vs Firebase Realtime Database
- PlanetScale vs CouchDB
- PlanetScale vs Amazon Aurora
- PlanetScale vs Nile
- PlanetScale vs MotherDuck
- PlanetScale vs DataGrip
- PlanetScale vs TiDB
- PlanetScale vs Readyset
- PlanetScale vs IBM Db2
- PlanetScale vs Instaclustr
- PlanetScale vs Knack
- PlanetScale vs LanceDB
- PlanetScale vs Marqo

