Managed relational databases · October 2026 Edition
Amazon RDS vs Supabase
Ten of fourteen models named Amazon RDS first on the direct prompt; zero named Supabase. Amazon RDS was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Supabase by nine and Amazon RDS carries 70 labels and Supabase 18, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in two categories this edition.
Named in three categories this edition.
First-choice share45%7%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate23%6%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#6A position in a field of 9; printed, not drawn.
Labels7018A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Amazon RDS reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Google Cloud SQL was named alongside these two in ten of the fourteen direct answers. Amazon RDS vs Amazon Aurora · Amazon RDS vs Google Cloud SQL · Amazon RDS vs Neon
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the managed relational databases page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Amazon RDSFirst choices, of fourteen modelsSupabase
Direct100
Paraphrase110
Comparative80
Budget-constrained245 against Amazon RDS
Scale-constrained30
Negative0011 against Amazon RDS · 1 against Supabase
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Amazon RDS and Supabase were named in the same answer fifty-three times, of the 189 answers naming Amazon RDS and the 82 naming Supabase. In those answers Supabase took the first choice nineteen times and Amazon RDS seven.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Amazon RDS and Supabase stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | | | |
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | | | |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | | | |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | | | | | | |
| Mistral Small | | |||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | | | ||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | |||
| Kimi K2 | | | | | | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | | |
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | | ||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | |||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | | | | |
Amazon RDS Supabase first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Amazon RDS on the left and Supabase on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Amazon RDS and Supabase stood in it.
Amazon RDS first, Supabase not the choice
10 of 14 modelsSupabase was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Claude Haiku 4.5Amazon RDS alternatives: Azure SQL Database
GPT-5.4 miniAmazon Aurora, Amazon RDS alternatives: Azure Database for PostgreSQL, Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
Perplexity SonarAmazon RDS alternatives: Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
DeepSeek V4 FlashAmazon RDS alternatives: Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
Llama 4 MaverickAmazon Aurora, Amazon RDS alternatives: Ntirety, Rackspace Technology
Qwen 3.7 FlashAmazon RDS alternatives: Azure Database for SQL Server / PostgreSQL, Neon, Vercel Postgres
Kimi K2Amazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL, Neon
MiniMax M2.5Amazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, DigitalOcean Managed Databases, Google Cloud SQL
GPT-6 LunaAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure Database for PostgreSQL, Google Cloud SQL
Muse Glimmer 30BAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
Neither was the first choice, one was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Grok 4.1 FastGoogle Cloud SQL alternatives: Aiven, Amazon RDS, Azure SQL Database, DigitalOcean Managed Databases
GLM 4.7 FlashXGoogle Cloud SQL alternatives: Amazon RDS, Azure Database
Neither was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Gemini 3.5 FlashAmazon Aurora alternatives: Aiven, AlloyDB for PostgreSQL, Azure SQL Database, Neon
Mistral SmallAmazon Aurora alternatives: Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Amazon RDS leads by six points.
Amazon RDS24%#1 of 8Supabase18%#2 of 8Mid-marketThe figures above
Amazon RDS leads by thirty-eight points.
Amazon RDS45%#1 of 9Supabase7%#6 of 9Enterprise
Amazon RDS leads by twenty points.
Amazon RDS20%#3 of 8Supabase0%#– of 8What the models said about Amazon RDS
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Some models explicitly recommend avoiding RDS for production core systems unless absolutely necessary.” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative
“are cautious with AWS RDS SQL Server for point-in-time restore expectations and with any RDS engine for globally distributed strong-consistency writes” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · soft negative
“It is widely used and legitimate, but multiple sources note that it can carry premium instance pricing, hidden ancillary costs” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“Amazon RDS, for example, supports MySQL, PostgreSQL, MariaDB, SQL Server, Oracle, and Amazon Aurora, and automates provisioning, patching, backups, and failover.” Llama 4 Maverick · comparative prompt · first choice
“Pick AWS RDS/Aurora for broadest engine breadth and ecosystem maturity, and for cloud-native Aurora performance with MySQL/PostgreSQL compatibility.” Muse Glimmer 30B · comparative prompt · first choice
“The top managed relational database services are Amazon RDS, Google Cloud SQL, Azure SQL Database, and Oracle Autonomous Database” Perplexity Sonar · comparative prompt · first choice
What the models said about Supabase
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of four in this category shown.
“you must be cautious about adopting it for long-term, enterprise-scale relational workloads” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“If you're just starting and want a free tier that doesn't expire, Supabase or Neon are excellent.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · budget prompt · first choice
“Supabase or Neon (both serverless PostgreSQL) stand out as the best managed relational database services” Grok 4.1 Fast · budget prompt · first choice
“My overall pick: For most small companies with limited budgets, Supabase is the best value” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
Also compared
Amazon RDS vs Amazon AuroraAmazon RDS vs Google Cloud SQLAmazon RDS vs NeonAmazon RDS vs DigitalOcean Managed DatabasesAmazon RDS vs Azure SQL DatabaseAmazon Aurora vs SupabaseGoogle Cloud SQL vs SupabaseNeon vs SupabaseDigitalOcean Managed Databases vs SupabaseSupabase vs Azure SQL DatabaseAll twenty-one head-to-head pages and the full managed databases standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.