Data is the lifeblood of modern business, but storing it shouldn’t bleed your budget dry. As we move into 2025, the cloud storage market has bifurcated into two distinct camps: the feature-rich, ecosystem-heavy giants like AWS, and the specialized, cost-effective challengers like Wasabi and Backblaze.
If you are looking to cut infrastructure costs without sacrificing durability, you aren’t alone. This guide breaks down AWS S3 vs. Wasabi vs. Backblaze B2, analyzing hidden fees, performance benchmarks, and “gotcha” clauses to help you choose the best object storage solution for your needs in 2025.
The Big Three: At a Glance
Before diving into the numbers, it is essential to understand the fundamental philosophy of each provider.
- Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service): The industry standard. It offers unmatched integration with the AWS ecosystem (EC2, Lambda) and sophisticated lifecycle management. However, it is notorious for complex pricing and high egress fees.
- Wasabi Hot Cloud Storage: A single-tier storage solution that markets itself on simplicity. They famously eliminated egress fees and API charges, offering a flat-rate pricing model.
- Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage: Originally a backup company, Backblaze evolved into an enterprise-grade object storage provider. They focus on extreme affordability and transparency, with no minimum retention penalties.
Pricing Comparison: The Core Breakdown
When comparing AWS S3 vs. Wasabi vs. Backblaze B2, the raw cost per Terabyte (TB) is usually the deciding factor. However, the total cost of ownership (TCO) often hides in the details—specifically egress (download) fees and API request charges.
Here is how the pricing stacks up for the US region in 2025:
| Feature | AWS S3 (Standard) | Wasabi | Backblaze B2 |
| Storage Cost | ~$23.00 / TB / month | $6.99 / TB / month | ~$6.00 / TB / month |
| Egress Fees (Download) | ~$0.09 / GB (First 100GB free) | Free* (Reasonable Use Policy) | Free up to 3x data stored |
| API Requests | Paid (e.g., $0.005/1k requests) | Free | Free (mostly) |
| Minimum Retention | None | 90 Days | None |
| Minimum Object Size | None | 4 KB | None |
Note: AWS prices decrease slightly for massive volume (over 50 TB), but for most SMBs and startups, the $23/TB baseline applies.
Deep Dive: AWS S3 – The Premium Ecosystem Choice
Amazon S3 remains the king of functionality. If your application heavily relies on AWS compute services like huge data lakes processed by Amazon Athena or trigger-based computing with Lambda, S3 is likely your best option due to the free data transfer within the AWS region.
Pros:
- Intelligent Tiering: Automatically moves data to cheaper “Glacier” tiers to save money (though retrieval speeds slow down).
- Reliability: The industry gold standard for “11 nines” (99.999999999%) of durability.
- Integrations: Seamlessly plugs into thousands of third-party enterprise tools.
Cons:
- Egress Shock: Downloading 10TB of data to the internet could cost you ~$900 in fees alone.
- Complexity: Understanding the six different storage classes requires significant mental overhead.
Best For: Enterprises already locked into the AWS ecosystem or applications requiring instant, massive-scale compute integration.
Learn more at the Official AWS S3 Pricing Page.
Deep Dive: Wasabi – The Predictable Flat Rate
Wasabi’s disruption of the market comes from its “Hot Cloud Storage” model. They treat all data as “hot” (instantly accessible) but price it closer to Amazon’s “cold” storage (Glacier).
Pros:
- No Egress Fees: This is a game-changer for content delivery or backups that need frequent testing.
- Speed: Performance often rivals S3 for standard read/write operations.
- Simplicity: One tier, one price. No need to manage lifecycle policies.
Cons:
- Retention Policy (The Gotcha): Wasabi charges for a minimum of 90 days of storage. If you upload a file and delete it the next day, you still pay for it for three months. This makes it poor for temporary data.
- Reasonable Use Policy: Their “free egress” is capped at the total amount of storage you have. If you store 10TB, you can download 10TB free. If you are running a heavy-traffic media server, they may flag you.
Best For: Long-term backups, video archiving, and secondary storage where data is rarely deleted quickly.
Check out Wasabi’s Pricing & FAQs.
Deep Dive: Backblaze B2 – The Flexible Budget King
Backblaze B2 is often cited as the true “developer’s choice” for independent storage. It avoids the retention traps of Wasabi while undercutting the price of AWS.
Pros:
- No Minimum Retention: You can store a file for 1 hour and delete it without penalty. This is crucial for dev/test environments and log rotation.
- Free Egress Alliance: Backblaze partners with CDNs like Cloudflare, Fastly, and Bunny.net to offer completely free egress if you route traffic through them.
- Lowest Base Price: At ~$6/TB, it is roughly 20% cheaper than Wasabi purely on storage costs.
Cons:
- Egress Limit: While generous (3x your storage volume is free), it is not technically “unlimited” without a CDN partner.
- Interface: The web UI is functional but less polished than the AWS Console.
Best For: Media serving (via Cloudflare), temporary staging files, server backups, and developers who want zero hidden fees.
Calculate your savings at Backblaze B2 Pricing.
Hidden Costs & Performance Considerations
When evaluating AWS S3 vs. Wasabi vs. Backblaze B2, you must look beyond the sticker price.
1. The “Egress” Trap
AWS charges heavily for data leaving their cloud. If you host 50TB of video footage on S3 and need to download it all to a local server for editing, you are looking at a bill of over $4,000. On Wasabi or Backblaze, that cost would likely be $0.
2. Speed and Latency
In 2025 benchmarks, AWS S3 generally still holds a slight edge in “Time to First Byte” (latency) due to their massive global edge network. However, for throughput (uploading/downloading large files), both Wasabi and Backblaze B2 saturate standard gigabit connections easily.
3. Durability
All three providers claim 11 nines (99.999999999%) of durability. They all replicate your data across multiple drives and physical locations. For 99% of businesses, the risk of data loss is statistically identical across all three.
Which One Should You Choose in 2025?
To summarize the AWS S3 vs. Wasabi vs. Backblaze B2 debate, here is a quick decision matrix:
- Choose AWS S3 if: You are building a complex application that runs entirely on EC2/Lambda and needs sub-millisecond integration, and you have the budget for premium reliability.
- Choose Wasabi if: You have static data (archives, backups) that you write once and read occasionally, and you want a predictable monthly bill with no math required.
- Choose Backblaze B2 if: You need the absolute lowest cost, you have “volatile” data that is deleted frequently (avoiding Wasabi’s 90-day fee), or you serve media publicly using Cloudflare (free bandwidth).
Conclusion
In 2025, paying the “AWS tax” for simple storage is no longer necessary for most use cases. While S3 remains the best choice for complex, compute-adjacent workloads, Backblaze B2 and Wasabi have matured into reliable, enterprise-ready alternatives that can slash your storage bill by 80% or more.
For pure flexibility and the lowest barrier to entry, Backblaze B2 currently holds the crown. However, for a set-it-and-forget-it archive tier, Wasabi remains a strong contender. Assess your data lifecycle—specifically how often you delete files—and choose the provider that aligns with your workflow, not just the one with the biggest brand name.
