Softwr

Databases · head to head

DynamoDB vs turbopuffer

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
turbopuffer logo

turbopuffer

Databases

Closed-source vector and full-text search service built directly on object storage, with cold queries measured in seconds rather than milliseconds.

From
$16/month
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only DynamoDB has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • 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.; turbopuffer a cold namespace pays object storage latency on the first query, with a documented p90 around 1,214 ms on a million documents, so any interactive search box needs the data kept warm or the user waits about a second.
  • They diverge on capability: DynamoDB covers Managed and serverless, turbopuffer covers Object storage architecture.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which DynamoDB and turbopuffer actually diverge.

Attributes where DynamoDB and turbopuffer differ
AttributeDynamoDBturbopuffer
Starting priceFree$16/month
Pricing modelusage-basedsubscription
Free tierYesNo
PlatformsAWSWeb
Founded2006Unknown

Identical on both: 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 turbopuffer

  • Object storage architecture
  • Namespaces
  • Vector search
  • Full-text search
  • Attribute filtering
  • Documented limits
  • Configurable consistency
  • Durable writes

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 turbopuffer
  • Traffic that spikes unpredictably, where on-demand capacity absorbs a burst without a capacity-planning exercisenot turbopuffer
  • Serverless applications on Lambda, where an HTTP-based datastore avoids the connection pooling problem relational databases havenot turbopuffer
  • Event or telemetry ingestion where writes vastly outnumber reads and each record is retrieved by a known identifiernot turbopuffer

turbopuffer

  • A product with one search index per customer and thousands of customers, most of whose data is idle on any given daynot DynamoDB
  • Very large corpora where holding every vector in memory is the dominant cost and occasional cold-query latency is acceptablenot DynamoDB
  • Hybrid retrieval combining BM25 and vector search where running and synchronising two separate systems is the problem being solvednot DynamoDB
  • Retrieval for agent and assistant products where indexes are created and destroyed frequently and per-index overhead must be near zeronot 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.

turbopuffer

  • A cold namespace pays object storage latency on the first query, with a documented p90 around 1,214 ms on a million documents, so any interactive search box needs the data kept warm or the user waits about a second.
  • Queries are eventually consistent by default, and after roughly 128 MiB of outstanding writes new data is invisible until indexed, which the vendor puts at tens of seconds for small namespaces and tens of minutes for large ones, so a bulk re-index is not immediately queryable.
  • It is closed source with no community edition, so single-tenant or bring-your-own-cloud deployment is a commercial negotiation rather than a deployment choice, and there is no path to running it yourself if the relationship ends.
  • Per-namespace ceilings, roughly 10,000 writes per second, 32 MB/s and 500 million documents per shard, mean a single enormous index has to be sharded across namespaces by your application rather than by the service.
  • It is a search engine, not a database: there are no joins, no cross-document transactions and no SQL, so it sits beside a primary datastore and keeping the two in step is work that belongs to you.

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

turbopuffer

$16/month
  • Launch$16/month
    • All database features
    • Multi-tenancy deployment
    • SOC2 & GDPR-ready DPA
  • Scale$256/month
    • Everything in Launch
    • HIPAA-ready BAA
    • Single Sign-On (SSO)
  • Enterprise$4096/month
    • Everything in Scale
    • Single-tenancy & BYOC deployment options
    • Private networking

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.
DynamoDB review

Choose turbopuffer if

  • You need object storage architecture.
  • You also want namespaces.
turbopuffer review

Questions people ask

Is DynamoDB or turbopuffer better?
Neither clearly leads. DynamoDB starts at Free and turbopuffer at $16/month, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, DynamoDB or turbopuffer?
DynamoDB has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for DynamoDB and $16/month for turbopuffer.
Does DynamoDB or turbopuffer run on more platforms?
DynamoDB runs on AWS. turbopuffer runs on Web.
Can I use DynamoDB for free?
Yes. DynamoDB has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. turbopuffer starts at $16/month.
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 turbopuffer is typically brought in for.
What can DynamoDB do that turbopuffer cannot?
DynamoDB covers Managed and serverless, Predictable latency, On-demand or provisioned capacity, Global secondary indexes. turbopuffer covers Object storage architecture, Namespaces, Vector search, Full-text search.

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.

turbopuffer: Can I self-host turbopuffer?

There is no open source or community edition. Single-tenant and bring-your-own-cloud deployments exist as commercial arrangements, but there is no way to run it independently of the vendor.

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.

turbopuffer: How fast is it really?

Warm queries perform comparably to in-memory search engines. Cold queries, where data is not cached, have a documented p90 around 1,214 ms on a million documents. Write p90 is around 248 ms for a 512 KB upsert because writes go straight to object storage.

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.

turbopuffer: Is it consistent?

Eventually consistent by default, with the vendor reporting that over 99.8% of queries return consistent data. Strong consistency can be requested per query at a latency cost. Large write bursts have a longer visibility delay while indexing catches up.

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.

turbopuffer: What is it best at?

Large numbers of namespaces where most are idle. The architecture makes cold data cheap to keep, which is exactly the shape of a multi-tenant product with a long tail of inactive customers.

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.

turbopuffer: What are the hard limits?

Up to 128 billion documents and 256 TB per namespace, 500 million documents per shard, 64 MiB per document, 10,752 dense vector dimensions, roughly 10,000 writes per second per namespace and a maximum result set of 10,000.

Share

Related pages

More on DynamoDB

More on turbopuffer

Keep looking

Other head to heads