preview

jimmyseo031 09 สิงหาคม 2569 , 11:36:26
Cloud storage pricing can look deceptively simple until storage capacity, downloads, API requests, retrieval charges, and egress fees are considered together. A provider advertising a low price per terabyte may become considerably more expensive when a business regularly moves large amounts of data out of the platform. For that reason, SSD prices comparing the headline storage rate alone does not give a complete picture of cloud storage costs.

This comparison looks at 14 major cloud and object-storage providers and focuses on the approximate monthly cost of storing 1 TB, while also considering outbound data transfer, commonly called egress or exit fees. The figures were checked against official pricing information available around July 2026. Because providers use different billing units and regional pricing structures, the figures should be treated as a practical comparison rather than a universal quote for every location.

Amazon S3 remains one of the best-known choices for scalable object storage, but its pricing model is more detailed than the simple storage rate suggests. S3 Standard storage in a typical US region is commonly listed around $0.023 per GB-month, which puts 1 TB at roughly $23.55 when calculated using 1,024 GB. Amazon also charges for internet data transfer out after the applicable free allowance. The standard internet egress rate commonly starts around $0.09 per GB at lower monthly tiers. AWS provides the first 100 GB of internet data transfer out each month free across eligible AWS services and regions. This means S3 can be inexpensive for data that mostly stays in storage, but regular downloads can materially increase the final bill.

Microsoft Azure Blob Storage is another major enterprise option. Its Hot storage tier is designed for frequently accessed data, making it comparable with standard object-storage tiers from AWS and Google Cloud. Azure pricing depends heavily on redundancy, region, access tier, transactions, and networking. For a fair comparison, users should select the same geography and redundancy level before comparing the storage figure with another provider. Azure also charges for outbound bandwidth after applicable allowances, so organizations with substantial downloads should calculate both storage and transfer rather than looking only at the per-GB storage rate.

Google Cloud Storage follows a similar model. Standard storage in a common US region is approximately $0.020 per GB-month, equivalent to about $20.48 for 1 TB using 1,024 GB. Google also charges for network usage, with outbound transfer rates varying according to the destination. A current Google pricing example uses $0.12 per GB for a first outbound tier, demonstrating why storage cost and data-transfer cost need to be considered together. Standard storage does not have a retrieval fee, while colder classes can add retrieval charges.

Wasabi has traditionally positioned itself around simple, predictable object-storage pricing, and its July 2026 pricing structure makes the distinction especially important. Effective July 1, 2026, Wasabi Hot Cloud Storage Pay-Go pricing became $7.99 per TB per month. Egress and API request charges remain free, subject to Wasabi's fair-use policies. This means a customer storing 1 TB and frequently downloading that data can potentially have a much more predictable bill than with hyperscale providers that separately meter internet egress. Wasabi itself provides an example comparing 1 TB of storage and 200 GB of monthly downloads with AWS, showing how free egress can substantially change the total calculation.

Backblaze B2 is another strong contender for cost-conscious object storage. Its current published pricing starts at $6.95 per TB per month. B2 includes free egress up to three times the average amount of stored data, so someone maintaining an average of 1 TB can receive up to 3 TB of free monthly egress under the standard allowance. Egress beyond that threshold is charged at $0.01 per GB. Backblaze also offers unlimited free egress to or through certain partner CDNs and cloud services, making the service particularly interesting for backup, media, and application workloads where data frequently leaves storage.

Cloudflare R2 takes a different approach by eliminating internet egress fees. Its Standard storage rate is $0.015 per GB-month, or approximately $15.36 per 1,024 GB-month before other charges. There are also Class A and Class B request fees, but data transfer to the public internet is free. This makes R2 particularly attractive for applications that store content and repeatedly serve that content to users. Its Infrequent Access tier costs $0.01 per GB-month, although retrieval charges apply to that class.

DigitalOcean Spaces is designed around a simpler subscription model. Its Standard Storage subscription has a base price of $5 per month and includes 250 GB of storage and 1 TB of outbound transfer. Additional storage and bandwidth can increase the total bill, so storing a full 1 TB is not simply the same as multiplying a single published GB rate by 1,024. The service can nevertheless be attractive for developers who value straightforward billing and integrated CDN capabilities. DigitalOcean's pricing documentation was verified in July 2026.

Vultr Object Storage uses subscription-based pricing rather than following exactly the same per-GB model as hyperscale providers. Its standard object-storage offerings include a monthly subscription with included storage and bandwidth, while its archival service is priced separately. The Vultr Archive subscription is $6 per month and includes 1,000 GB of archival storage, 100 GB of unarchived storage, and 1 TB of bandwidth. Additional archival storage is $0.006 per GB-month, while bandwidth beyond the included allowance costs $10 per TB. The archival tier is therefore particularly relevant for datasets that are inexpensive to store but do not need to be accessed constantly.

Akamai Connected Cloud, formerly known as Linode, also uses a relatively straightforward object-storage structure. Its historical object-storage model provides 250 GB for $5 per month together with 1 TB of outbound transfer, with additional storage priced separately and excess outbound transfer charged after the included allowance. The exact network allowance can interact with the broader account transfer pool, so users should check their current regional account configuration before calculating a production bill.

Storj offers a particularly different cost structure because its architecture is designed around distributed storage and built-in geographic redundancy. Current published information shows storage at approximately $4 per TB per month and egress at approximately $7 per TB. That combination makes the service noteworthy for workloads where both storage and data movement matter. Unlike a provider with expensive traditional internet egress, the relatively low transfer rate can make frequent downloads easier to budget.

OVHcloud has become increasingly interesting for customers concerned about egress costs. OVHcloud announced that there are no more egress fees on its Object Storage service from January 1, 2026. Its object storage is offered in several classes, including Standard, High Performance, Infrequent Access, Active Archive, and Cold Archive. The provider states that public egress is included, although lower-cost archival classes can have retrieval and minimum-duration rules. This makes the effective cost dependent on both the selected storage tier and how often the stored data is retrieved.

Alibaba Cloud Object Storage Service, commonly called OSS, uses pay-as-you-go pricing and offers several storage classes, including Standard, Infrequent Access, Archive, and Cold Archive. The standard rate varies according to region and redundancy configuration. Alibaba's documentation gives an example of Standard LRS storage at $0.0173 per GB-month, which would be approximately $17.72 per 1,024 GB-month. Outbound internet traffic is separately billable, so customers with substantial downloads need to include traffic charges in their calculation. Resource plans can reduce storage and transfer costs when usage is predictable.

IBM Cloud Object Storage uses a consumption-based model in which customers pay according to stored data, public outbound bandwidth, and operations. IBM also offers different pricing models for larger deployments. Its One-Rate offering is especially notable at very large scale: IBM announced a $10 per TB monthly rate for environments with 2 PB or more of One-Rate storage, with the model designed to include storage, egress, and operations. That price is not directly comparable with the normal small-account rate because it requires a very large storage footprint, but it demonstrates how enterprise-scale pricing can differ dramatically from standard public rates.

Oracle Cloud Infrastructure Object Storage publishes a Standard Object Storage rate of approximately $0.0255 per GB-month after the small free allowance, equivalent to about $26.11 per 1,024 GB-month. Oracle's major advantage for high-egress workloads is its generous network allowance. OCI provides the first 10 TB of public internet egress per month free, after which outbound bandwidth is charged. Oracle states that its egress pricing is designed to be substantially lower than many competing cloud platforms. For workloads that regularly move several terabytes out of storage, this free allowance can have a major effect on total cost.

When these providers are compared strictly on storage price, the cheapest options are not necessarily the cheapest overall. Storj, Backblaze B2, Wasabi, Cloudflare R2, and several specialist object-storage services can look especially attractive for workloads with predictable storage requirements. However, the real winner changes when the workload begins downloading hundreds of gigabytes or multiple terabytes every month.

For example, imagine a business storing 1 TB and downloading 1 TB every month. A provider charging $20 to $25 for storage but another $80 to $120 for outbound transfer could end up costing several times more than a provider charging $7 to $15 for storage with free or heavily discounted egress. This is why a comparison based solely on the advertised storage price can be misleading.

The difference becomes even larger for video, software distribution, backup restoration, analytics, and AI datasets. These workloads can generate substantial outbound traffic. A backup archive might sit untouched for months and therefore favor a low storage rate. A video platform may store the same 1 TB but serve hundreds of gigabytes or several terabytes to users every month. In that case, egress policy can matter more than the basic storage rate.

The comparison also shows why “egress-free” does not always mean “completely free.” Cloudflare R2 has no internet egress fee, but it still charges for storage and operations, and its Infrequent Access tier has retrieval charges. Wasabi advertises free egress and API requests but applies fair-use conditions. Backblaze B2 provides a defined free-egress allowance and charges beyond that threshold. OVHcloud includes public egress, while archival storage can introduce retrieval-related considerations. Each provider therefore needs to be evaluated according to the actual workload rather than a single marketing headline.

Another important factor is the difference between decimal and binary units. Some providers price using GB and TB in decimal units, while others document storage using GiB and TiB. A nominal 1 TB can therefore represent 1,000 GB in one calculation and 1,024 GB in another. Even when the difference looks small, it can become meaningful across hundreds of terabytes.

Storage class is equally important. Standard or hot storage is normally the correct comparison for frequently accessed information, but it is rarely the cheapest option for long-term archives. Nearline, cold, archive, and deep-archive tiers can dramatically reduce monthly storage charges, but they often introduce minimum storage periods and retrieval fees. Google Cloud, Alibaba Cloud, OVHcloud, Vultr, and other providers all demonstrate how lower storage prices can come with different access economics.

API operations should also be considered when a workload contains millions of small files. A service that looks inexpensive at 1 TB may become more expensive if the application constantly lists, reads, writes, or deletes objects. This is particularly relevant for websites, software repositories, data lakes, and applications that use object storage as a live database-like layer.

The most useful way to compare cloud storage is therefore to calculate three numbers rather than one: monthly storage cost, monthly data transfer cost, and monthly request or retrieval cost. For archival workloads, minimum-retention and early-deletion charges should be added as a fourth consideration. Once these values are calculated against the same workload, the apparent price differences become much clearer.

For a simple 1 TB storage-only workload with very little data leaving the service, low-cost providers such as Backblaze B2, Wasabi, Cloudflare R2, and Storj can be highly competitive. For workloads that require large amounts of outbound traffic, Cloudflare R2, Wasabi, OVHcloud, Backblaze B2, and Oracle OCI deserve particular attention because their egress policies can reduce or eliminate a major source of cloud bills. For enterprise workloads requiring extensive integration, geographic choices, advanced storage classes, compliance controls, and mature ecosystems, AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud may justify higher pricing because storage is only one component of a much larger cloud platform.

The key lesson from the July 2026 comparison is that the cheapest cloud storage provider is not necessarily the provider with the lowest price per TB. A $7 or $8 storage bill can become expensive if every download generates additional transfer charges, while a $15 or $20 storage service with free egress can be cheaper for a data-heavy application. Conversely, free egress does not automatically make a provider ideal if request, retrieval, redundancy, or archival charges dominate the workload.

Before choosing a provider, businesses should estimate how much data they will store, how much they will upload, how much they will download, how frequently objects will be accessed, how long the data must remain stored, and where users or applications are located. Running those figures through each provider's official calculator is the safest way to obtain a production estimate because published rates can change and may differ by region.

Based on the official pricing information reviewed for July 2026, the market is increasingly divided between traditional hyperscale platforms that offer enormous feature sets and specialist object-storage providers that compete aggressively on predictable storage and transfer costs. AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud remain powerful choices for organizations already operating deeply within their ecosystems, while Backblaze B2, Wasabi, Cloudflare R2, Storj, OVHcloud, DigitalOcean, Vultr, and similar services can be compelling when predictable object-storage economics are the priority.

Ultimately, the best cloud storage price per TB is the one that matches the complete workload. Storage capacity is only the starting point. Egress, retrieval, operations, redundancy, minimum-duration requirements, and included bandwidth can determine the real monthly cost. Anyone comparing providers in 2026 should therefore look beyond the headline “price per TB” and calculate the total cost of keeping, accessing, and moving the data.