Cloud Warehouse Comparison

Google BigQuery vs Amazon Redshift

Independent comparison for technology buyers. Updated May 2026.

Quick verdict: Choose Google BigQuery when running primarily on Google Cloud, when serverless on-demand pricing aligns with ad-hoc analytics, or when Vertex AI and Looker integration matters. Choose Amazon Redshift when AWS-native with deep S3, Glue, and SageMaker integration is preferred, or when Reserved Instance economics drive predictable workload procurement. The differentiator is serverless GCP warehouse versus provisioned-or-serverless AWS warehouse with S3 lakehouse depth.

CriteriaGoogle BigQueryAmazon Redshift
Rating4.5 / 5.0 (2,400 reviews)4.2 / 5.0 (2,100 reviews)
ArchitectureServerless, slot-based, fully managedRA3 nodes with managed storage, Serverless
Cloud DeploymentGoogle Cloud onlyAWS only
Pricing ModelPer-TB scanned + reserved slotsNode-hour, RPU-hour, storage
ML / AIBigQuery ML + Vertex AI / GeminiRedshift ML + SageMaker
BI IntegrationLooker native, Power BI, TableauPower BI, Tableau, QuickSight
Lake IntegrationBigLake, external Iceberg / DeltaSpectrum, Iceberg, Lake Formation
StreamingStreaming inserts, subscriptionsStreaming ingestion, Kinesis integration
Best ForGCP estates, serverless analytics, AIAWS estates, RI economics, S3 lakehouse

Feature comparison

Google BigQuery is a serverless cloud data warehouse on Google Cloud. Storage uses a proprietary columnar format; compute runs on slots from a shared on-demand pool or reserved capacity (Standard, Enterprise, Enterprise Plus editions). The serverless model removes warehouse sizing; analysts submit queries directly. BigQuery ML provides in-SQL machine learning; Vertex AI integration extends into Gemini and managed ML services. BigLake reads Iceberg and Delta tables in Cloud Storage.

Amazon Redshift is AWS-native with the RA3 architecture decoupling compute from storage on Redshift Managed Storage (backed by S3). Redshift Serverless removes node provisioning for spiky workloads. Redshift Spectrum queries S3 directly (Parquet, Iceberg). Redshift ML wraps SageMaker for in-database training and inference. Tight integration with Lake Formation, Glue, and Kinesis simplifies AWS-centric architectures.

For Google Cloud-centric estates, BigQuery typically wins on integration and developer experience. For AWS-centric estates, Redshift typically wins on AWS integration economics. Cross-cloud organisations frequently bring in Snowflake or Databricks to bridge clouds; see Snowflake vs Redshift for additional context.

Pricing comparison

BigQuery on-demand pricing is approximately $6.25/TB scanned; reserved slot editions are priced per slot-hour with annual commitments at significant discount. Active storage runs around $20/TB/month, long-term storage around $10/TB/month. Enterprise BigQuery spend commonly lands $200,000-$8M ARR.

Redshift RA3 dc2 instances start around $0.85/hour on demand, with 1-year and 3-year Reserved Instance discounts of 30-60%. Redshift Serverless is around $0.36/RPU-hour with an 8-RPU minimum. Storage on RMS runs about $0.024/GB/month. Enterprise Redshift spend typically lands $200,000-$8M ARR. AWS EDP can significantly reduce effective cost.

When to choose Google BigQuery

Choose Google BigQuery when the data estate is GCP-centric, when serverless on-demand or reserved slot economics fit usage patterns, when Vertex AI and Gemini integration drive AI strategy, or when Looker is the BI platform of record.

When to choose Amazon Redshift

Choose Amazon Redshift when AWS-native integration with S3 (Spectrum, Iceberg), Glue, Lake Formation, Kinesis, and SageMaker is preferred, when Reserved Instance economics align with predictable workloads, or when AWS EDP terms make Redshift economical at consolidated AWS scale.

Alternatives to both

Multi-cloud data cloud, virtual warehouses
4.6
Lakehouse on Delta, multi-cloud
4.6
Microsoft unified analytics platform
4.3
Full Google BigQuery Review → Full Amazon Redshift Review → All Data Analytics →

Frequently Asked Questions

Which has better AI integration?
BigQuery integrates with Vertex AI and Gemini natively on Google Cloud. Redshift ML integrates with SageMaker. Both deliver substantive in-database ML; choice typically follows the broader cloud strategy.
Which is cheaper?
Workload-dependent. BigQuery on-demand can be very cost-effective for ad-hoc analytics with modest scan volumes; Redshift Reserved Instances are economical for steady predictable workloads. Compare on representative workloads.
Can I run BigQuery on AWS or Redshift on GCP?
No. BigQuery is GCP-only; Redshift is AWS-only. BigQuery Omni allows querying AWS S3 and Azure Blob data from BigQuery, but the service still runs on Google Cloud.
Which is faster?
Workload-dependent. BigQuery autoscales via slots; Redshift gives explicit cluster or RPU control. Run benchmarks on representative queries and concurrency.
Can the two coexist?
Yes. Many estates run BigQuery for GCP-side analytics and Redshift for AWS-side, federated through Glue, BigQuery Omni, or external Iceberg tables.
Last updated: May 2026
Last updated:

Related pages

This Bigquery vs. Redshift comparison summarises the practical differences between the two options for enterprise buyers. The analysis covers pricing models, target customer size, deployment options, integration coverage, and customer-reported strengths. Use the related comparisons below to evaluate either product against other alternatives.