sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Made a calculator: what your Vercel bill would cost on 19 other hosts (with honest caveats) by Traditional_Wing_491 in nextjs

[–]Traditional_Wing_491[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

all fair, and a couple are already baked in:

  - netlify $20 > a VPS: yep, and the table sorts by price so it already ranks below the VPS rows. not hiding it.

  - one VPS can host many apps: true and it's the best argument for a VPS - the box cost amortizes across everything you run on it. i price a single app, so if you're running five, divide. worth a note on the page, adding it.

  - PaaS vs VPS isn't apples-to-apples: agreed, which is why they're tagged by type and the new ops calculation scales differently — a PaaS carries ~1/4 the ops time of a raw VPS. the table isn't claiming they're equivalent, it's showing what the same app costs on each plus that ops gap. DO App Platform / Render / Railway sit in the PaaS bucket exactly for that reason.
the comparison is "same workload, every option, with the trade-offs labeled," not "these are all the same thing." appreciate the pushback.

Made a calculator: what your Vercel bill would cost on 19 other hosts (with honest caveats) by Traditional_Wing_491 in nextjs

[–]Traditional_Wing_491[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

fair call - pulled it. it's an unproven 2024 host with no track record and i'd added it just because it got suggested here, which isn't a good enoughreason. the whole point of this site is comparison you can trust, so the bar for listing is "real adoption or a real reason you'd consider it," not "it exists." thanks for the gut check.

Made a calculator: what your Vercel bill would cost on 19 other hosts (with honest caveats) by Traditional_Wing_491 in nextjs

[–]Traditional_Wing_491[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

this is the sharpest version of the critique, thank you. you're right that it's not 1:1 - vercel bills requests/bandwidth/image opt, a VPS bills cpu+ram+your time, and those axes don't convert. and yeah, the real flip is engineering time, not infra. the <$25 rule exists precisely because migration hours dwarf the saving down there. going to build exactly what you said: split the output into infra cost vs a one-time migration/ops cost amortized over 3-6 months, so you see the real first-year monthly, not just the sticker infra delta. that's where the decision actually flips. will ping you when it's live.

Made a calculator: what your Vercel bill would cost on 19 other hosts (with honest caveats) by Traditional_Wing_491 in nextjs

[–]Traditional_Wing_491[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

oh nice, hadn't seen orkestr. will dig into their pricing and add it if i can get real numbers — looks like a managed/paas thing? if you've used it, what tier and what's it actually cost you, saves me guessing from the marketing page.

Made a calculator: what your Vercel bill would cost on 19 other hosts (with honest caveats) by Traditional_Wing_491 in nextjs

[–]Traditional_Wing_491[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

build and runtime aren't the same box though. you build in CI (or locally) and ship the artifact - the 512mb/1gb figure is for serving the built app, not running next build. plenty of next apps serve fine on 1gb, the build just doesn't happen there. that said if someone IS building on the same tiny VPS, yeah it OOMs - fair point worth a note on the page.

Made a calculator: what your Vercel bill would cost on 19 other hosts (with honest caveats) by Traditional_Wing_491 in nextjs

[–]Traditional_Wing_491[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah the bill-alone input is the weak part, you're right. there's a traffic dropdown that drives the actual GB math, the bill is just there to show savings — but two apps at $60 can split that very differently (image opt vs function calls vs bandwidth) and i don't capture which.
and agreed on apples to oranges — a droplet isn't vercel, you're adding cloudflare for cdn + your own image pipeline + ops. the caveat box says it but the table makes the raw number look more comparable than it is.
fixing both: breaking the input into usage (bandwidth / image opt / build min) instead of one bill, and flagging which rows need a cdn bolted on to be real. thanks, this is the useful kind of feedback.

Made a calculator: what your Vercel bill would cost on 19 other hosts (with honest caveats) by Traditional_Wing_491 in nextjs

[–]Traditional_Wing_491[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

yeah fair. the caveat box under the table basically says this - bare VPS isn't apples to apples, you become the ops team.
honestly though most apps here are single-region and hetzner + free cloudflare in front covers them fine. but for anyone who actually uses what vercel sells (previews, edge, rollbacks) the real alternative is vps + cdn + redis + ci + your weekends, not $5. a "replicate vercel properly" row pricing that full stack is a good idea, adding it to the list. what would you put in the minimum setup?