Everyone says "it depends" when you ask about cloud costs. But I wanted real numbers. So I ran the same Next.js application on both AWS and Vercel for 6 months and tracked every penny.
Here's what I learned.
The Setup
To make this a fair comparison, I deployed identical Next.js applications:
- Framework: Next.js 14 with App Router
- Traffic: ~50,000 monthly visitors
- Pages: 25 static pages + 10 dynamic routes
- API Routes: 5 serverless functions
- Images: ~200 optimized images
- Build Time: ~3 minutes
The Costs: Month by Month
| Month | AWS Cost | Vercel Cost | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Month 1 | $18.42 | $20.00 | AWS |
| Month 2 | $16.89 | $20.00 | AWS |
| Month 3 | $22.15 | $20.00 | Vercel |
| Month 4 | $19.33 | $20.00 | AWS |
| Month 5 | $17.56 | $20.00 | AWS |
| Month 6 | $20.08 | $20.00 | Vercel (barely) |
| Total | $114.43 | $120.00 | AWS ($5.57 cheaper) |
Surprise finding: The cost difference was negligible—less than $1/month on average. But the hidden costs told a different story.
AWS Cost Breakdown
Here's where my AWS money went each month (average):
- S3 Storage: $0.50 (static files)
- CloudFront: $12.00 (CDN bandwidth)
- Lambda: $3.50 (API routes)
- Route 53: $0.50 (DNS)
- CloudWatch: $2.00 (logs and monitoring)
- Data Transfer: $0.50
Total: ~$19/month
Vercel Cost Breakdown
Vercel was simpler:
- Pro Plan: $20.00/month (flat rate)
That's it. Everything included.
The Hidden Costs
But here's where it gets interesting. The dollar amounts don't tell the whole story.
Time Investment
- AWS Setup Time: 6 hours (S3, CloudFront, Lambda, GitHub Actions)
- Vercel Setup Time: 15 minutes (connect GitHub, done)
If you value your time at $50/hour, that's $300 in setup time for AWS vs $12.50 for Vercel. Suddenly Vercel looks a lot cheaper.
Maintenance Time
Over 6 months:
- AWS: ~4 hours debugging CloudFront cache issues, updating Lambda functions, fixing GitHub Actions workflow
- Vercel: 0 hours (it just worked)
Monitoring and Debugging
- AWS: Had to set up CloudWatch, configure alarms, debug through multiple services
- Vercel: Built-in analytics, deployment logs, and error tracking
When AWS Wins
Despite the complexity, AWS made sense for:
- High traffic sites: At 500k+ monthly visitors, AWS becomes significantly cheaper
- Custom requirements: Need specific Lambda configurations or VPC access? AWS gives you that control
- Existing AWS infrastructure: If you're already using RDS, DynamoDB, etc., staying in AWS makes sense
- Cost optimization: With Reserved Instances and Savings Plans, you can reduce costs by 30-50%
When Vercel Wins
Vercel was the clear winner for:
- Speed to market: Deploy in minutes, not hours
- Developer experience: Preview deployments, automatic HTTPS, zero config
- Small to medium traffic: Under 100k monthly visitors, the flat $20 is predictable
- Teams: Built-in collaboration features, deployment previews for PRs
- Peace of mind: No surprise bills, no debugging infrastructure
The Real Cost Comparison
Here's my honest assessment:
| Factor | AWS | Vercel |
|---|---|---|
| Monthly Cost (50k visitors) | $15-25 | $20 (flat) |
| Setup Time | 4-8 hours | 15 minutes |
| Maintenance | 1-2 hours/month | 0 hours |
| Predictability | Variable | Fixed |
| Scalability | Excellent | Excellent |
| Developer Experience | Complex | Excellent |
My Recommendation
For most projects, start with Vercel. The time savings and developer experience are worth the slight cost premium. If you grow to 500k+ monthly visitors or need specific AWS features, then migrate to AWS.
But here's the thing: both are great options. The "best" choice depends on your specific situation, traffic, and priorities.
Want to Try Both?
Check out our deployment blueprints for:
Both include complete configurations so you can deploy in minutes and see which works better for you.
Have your own cost comparison data? I'd love to hear about it! Get in touch.
← Back to Blog