Cloud egress: AWS vs GCP multi-cloud path templates

Path matrix: AWS vs GCP multi-cloud egress path templates (educational)
Path class	AWS lens	GCP lens	Notes
Internet egress	EC2/S3/ELB SKUs; tiered	Compute/Cloud Storage; tiered	SKU names differ — map by path
Same-zone / same-AZ	Often free in AZ	Same-zone often free	Confirm product exceptions
Cross-AZ / cross-zone	Cross-AZ charges common	Inter-zone pricing on many products	HA designs multiply bytes
Cross-region	Inter-region DT	Inter-region / multi-region bucket	Replication ≠ user egress
Premium vs standard network	Internet vs backbone nuances	Premium Tier vs Standard Tier	Latency vs $/GB tradeoff

Path matrix: AWS vs GCP multi-cloud egress path templates (educational)

Path class

AWS lens

GCP lens

Notes

Internet egress

EC2/S3/ELB SKUs; tiered

Compute/Cloud Storage; tiered

SKU names differ — map by path

Same-zone / same-AZ

Often free in AZ

Same-zone often free

Confirm product exceptions

Cross-AZ / cross-zone

Cross-AZ charges common

Inter-zone pricing on many products

HA designs multiply bytes

Cross-region

Inter-region DT

Inter-region / multi-region bucket

Replication ≠ user egress

Premium vs standard network

Internet vs backbone nuances

Premium Tier vs Standard Tier

Latency vs $/GB tradeoff

Provider source footnotes

AWS EC2 on-demand pricing (data transfer) — as-of 2026-09-09 Unknown until verified

GCP network pricing — as-of 2026-09-09 Unknown until verified

GCP Cloud Storage pricing — as-of 2026-09-09 Unknown until verified

Dated starting points only — Unknown until verified means no invented $/GB. PipeToll does not scrape private consoles or guarantee figures.

Generic pricing pages collapse distinct meters. PipeToll uses multi-cloud path templates so FinOps reviews compare the same traffic shapes — including Internet egress, cross-AZ / inter-zone, and cross-region edges. Keep unverified rates Unknown until verified.

Path templates to model

API responses to mobile clients — Internet egress from regional compute or LB.
Multi-AZ / multi-zone database replicas — cross-AZ chatter can exceed user-facing egress.
Object replication — separate meter from end-user downloads.
Analytics export to partner bucket — cross-cloud: source egress + destination ops.
Premium vs standard Internet path — tier choice is part of the template.

Common traps

Comparing only Internet egress $/GB ignores NAT gateways, LB bytes, and premium network tiers. Assuming GCP inter-zone equals AWS cross-AZ without product checks misprices HA. Migrations that ignore dual-running egress understate cutover months. No guaranteed savings from switching clouds.

FinOps checklist

Draw one diagram; label Internet, inter-zone, inter-region edges.
Pull 90-day bytes per edge from both clouds (or estimates).
Price each edge with dated sources; badge Unknown otherwise.
Include NAT/LB SKUs on the AWS side when paths use them; sibling VPC endpoints vs NAT.
Reference cross-AZ spoke, calculator (?mode=gb&path=aws-gcp), methodology.

FinOps-lite Unknown until verified

Worked example (educational): same 4 TB Internet + 1 TB inter-zone

Hold workload shape fixed: 4,000 GB Internet responses + 1,000 GB inter-zone/cross-AZ chatter. Price each path with provider-specific verified rates (two Mode A runs). Premium network tiers can change Internet $/GB — do not assume one number transfers. Educational only; not a migration savings guarantee.

FAQ on this path

Can I compare AWS and GCP using one $/GB?

No. Map identical path templates first (Internet, inter-zone, inter-region), then apply each cloud’s dated rates.

Do premium network tiers matter?

Yes. Latency and $/GB tradeoffs differ. Treat tier choice as part of the path template.

Is replication the same as user egress?

Usually no. Replication/multi-region bucket meters should stay on separate lines.