Softwr

Developer Tools · head to head

Envoy vs Qdrant

Envoy logo

Envoy

Developer Tools

A high-performance L7 proxy written in C++ that is configured by an API rather than a config file, and is usually deployed under a control plane.

From
Free
Free plan
Yes
Visit EnvoyFull review
Qdrant logo

Qdrant

Databases

High-performance vector database for similarity search and embedding-based retrieval

From
Free
Free plan
Yes
Visit QdrantFull review

The short version

  • Qdrant is an open-source vector search engine.
  • Both are free.
  • Where Qdrant falls short: free tier extremely limited (0.5 vCPU, 1GB RAM, 4GB disk); suitable only for experiments.
  • Prices and features on this page were last checked on 13 November 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Envoy and Qdrant actually diverge.

Attributes where Envoy and Qdrant differ
AttributeEnvoyQdrant
Pricing modelOpen-sourceFreemium
PlatformsWebWeb, Self-hosted, Browser extension, Serverless (coming)
CategoryDeveloper ToolsDatabases

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes).

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 Envoy

  • xDS dynamic configuration
  • Protocol breadth
  • Filter chain architecture
  • Observability by default
  • Outlier detection
  • Traffic shaping
  • mTLS termination and origination
  • Hot restart

Only in Qdrant

Nothing recorded that Envoy does not also cover.

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Envoy

  • Acting as the data plane under a service mesh or Gateway API implementation, which is how the overwhelming majority of deployments use itnot Qdrant
  • An edge or API gateway that needs per-route retry budgets, circuit breaking and outlier detection rather than round-robin proxyingnot Qdrant
  • Migrating traffic between service versions or between a monolith and its replacement, using weighted splits and shadow trafficnot Qdrant
  • Standardising observability across a polyglot estate, so that latency, error rates and tracing look the same regardless of the language a service is written innot Qdrant

Qdrant

  • Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) backends for LLM applicationsnot Envoy
  • Semantic search across large document corporanot Envoy
  • Multimodal retrieval (text, images, video) for recommendation systemsnot Envoy
  • Similarity-based product or content recommendationsnot Envoy
  • Real-time vector indexing for streaming embedding datanot Envoy

Where each one falls short

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

Envoy

  • The configuration surface is very large and hand-written bootstrap YAML runs to hundreds of lines for routing that Nginx expresses in twenty, which is why nearly every production deployment sits under a control plane and inherits that control plane's constraints as well
  • xDS is the real API and it is not stable in the comfortable sense; the v2 API set was removed outright, resource types continue to be deprecated, and your control plane and Envoy binaries have to be upgraded roughly in step or the proxies stop accepting configuration
  • Extending it properly means writing a C++ filter and building and maintaining your own Envoy binary; the alternatives are Lua, which adds per-request overhead, and proxy-wasm, whose ABI has remained effectively experimental for years with a real performance cost
  • At sidecar density the per-proxy memory and CPU footprint is a measurable share of cluster capacity, since thousands of workloads each carry a full proxy, and this is precisely the cost that has pushed mesh projects towards node-level or ambient architectures
  • There is no single vendor selling support for Envoy itself; you get the community plus control-plane vendors such as Solo.io and Tetrate, so an Envoy-level production bug is your own engineers in a C++ codebase unless a support contract happens to cover it
  • Diagnosing why a request got a particular response involves reading config dumps, the stats endpoint and the RESPONSE_FLAGS codes in access logs rather than a readable error, which is a specific skill you must hire or spend months growing

Qdrant

  • Free tier extremely limited (0.5 vCPU, 1GB RAM, 4GB disk); suitable only for experiments
  • Standard and Premium pricing usage-based; specific costs not published; requires calculator or quote
  • Requires understanding of embeddings and vector search concepts; not suitable for SQL-only teams
  • Early-stage serverless offering (coming soon) suggests maturity gaps in that deployment model

Pricing, plan by plan

Envoy

Free

No published plan breakdown. See the Envoy review.

Qdrant

Free
  • FreeFree
    • Single-node cluster
    • 0.5 vCPU
    • 1GB RAM
  • StandardOn request
    • Dedicated resources
    • Flexible scaling
    • High availability
  • PremiumOn request
    • SSO and SAML
    • Private VPC links
    • 99.9% uptime SLA

Which should you pick?

Choose Envoy if

  • You need xds dynamic configuration.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You also want protocol breadth.
Envoy review

Choose Qdrant if

  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, Self-hosted, Browser extension, Serverless (coming).
Qdrant review

Questions people ask

Is Envoy or Qdrant better?
Neither clearly leads. Envoy starts at Free and Qdrant at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Envoy or Qdrant?
Envoy starts at Free and Qdrant at Free.
Does Envoy or Qdrant run on more platforms?
Envoy runs on Web. Qdrant runs on Web, Self-hosted, Browser extension, Serverless (coming).
Can I use Envoy for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Envoy best used for?
Envoy is most often used for acting as the data plane under a service mesh or gateway api implementation, which is how the overwhelming majority of deployments use it, an edge or api gateway that needs per-route retry budgets, circuit breaking and outlier detection rather than round-robin proxying, migrating traffic between service versions or between a monolith and its replacement, using weighted splits and shadow traffic, standardising observability across a polyglot estate, so that latency, error rates and tracing look the same regardless of the language a service is written in. Of those, acting as the data plane under a service mesh or gateway api implementation, which is how the overwhelming majority of deployments use it and an edge or api gateway that needs per-route retry budgets, circuit breaking and outlier detection rather than round-robin proxying are not what Qdrant is typically brought in for.
What can Envoy do that Qdrant cannot?
Envoy covers xDS dynamic configuration, Protocol breadth, Filter chain architecture, Observability by default.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Envoy: Should I run Envoy on its own, or under a control plane?

Almost always under one. Directly authoring xDS or static bootstrap configuration is viable for a handful of routes and becomes unmanageable beyond that. Envoy Gateway, Istio, Contour, Gloo and Consul all exist to generate that configuration for you.

Qdrant: Can I use Qdrant for free?

Yes, Qdrant offers a free tier that provides a single node cluster with 0.5 vCPU, 1GB RAM, and 4GB disk space. It includes free cloud inference with selected models and is described as free forever for testing and prototypes.

Source
Envoy: How does it compare with Nginx or HAProxy?

Envoy is dynamically configured over an API and instrumented far more heavily; Nginx and HAProxy are faster to configure and lighter for straightforward reverse proxying. If you never need to change routing without a reload, Envoy is more machinery than the problem requires.

Qdrant: How is Qdrant Cloud billing calculated?

Billing is calculated based on actual resource usage during each billing period. You are charged hourly for compute (vCPU), memory (GB), storage (GB), backups, and any paid inference tokens used.

Source
Envoy: What does it cost?

Nothing to licence; it is Apache 2.0 and there is no paid edition. The cost is engineering time and, for most organisations, a commercial control plane or cloud service that packages it.

Qdrant: What happens if I scale beyond the free tier?

The Standard Tier uses the same usage-based billing model as the free tier but adds features like dedicated resources with flexible scaling, highly available setups with backup and disaster recovery, and a 99.5% uptime SLA.

Source
Envoy: Can I write extensions without C++?

You can write Lua filters or proxy-wasm modules in Rust, Go, C++ or AssemblyScript. Both carry per-request overhead compared with a native filter, and the Wasm path has been slower to stabilise than the project originally projected.

Qdrant: What SLA does Qdrant offer?

The Standard Tier provides 99.5% uptime SLA. The Premium Tier, which requires a minimum spend for enterprises, offers 99.9% uptime SLA along with single sign-on and private VPC links.

Source
Envoy: Is it a CNCF project?

Yes, it is a graduated CNCF project licensed under Apache 2.0, which means the trademark and governance sit with the foundation rather than with Lyft or any vendor.

Qdrant: Are there dedicated cloud infrastructure options?

Yes, Qdrant offers Hybrid Cloud (runs on your infrastructure) and Private Cloud (complete isolation) options, both with custom pricing that requires contacting the sales team.

Source
Share

Related pages

More on Envoy

More on Qdrant

Keep looking

Other head to heads