GCP to AWS Migration: Cost, Timeline & Decision Guide

Plan a GCP to AWS migration with evidence from 58 projects: $400K–$4M costs, a 10-month median timeline, go/no-go criteria, and technical risks.

Updated ·58 verified projects·Peter Korpak·Methodology

Key findings

74%Success rateacross 58 projects
$1.4MMedian cost
10 monthsMedian timeline

Risk of inactionGCP-specific service adoption (BigQuery, Vertex AI) compounds migration complexity over time. Each new GCP-native service integration adds to future migration scope.

Should you migrate from GCP to AWS?

GCP-to-AWS migration fits organizations standardizing compute and storage on AWS with limited BigQuery or Vertex AI dependency. Across 58 analyzed projects, the median cost was $1.4M and the median timeline was 10 months. Keep or optimize GCP when proprietary services or committed-use penalties outweigh consolidation benefits.

The work extends beyond moving virtual machines. Teams must translate Google's global control plane into AWS's regional model, decide whether BigQuery workloads belong on Redshift or Athena, and redesign project-based IAM around AWS accounts, roles, and service control policies.


How do you decide whether to leave GCP?

A GCP exit is viable when data consumers, engineering skills, contract economics, and cloud-native dependencies all favor AWS. Score each criterion before approving the migration; a weak result in BigQuery dependency or egress planning can invalidate the business case.

CriteriaThreshold for "Go"Score (0-10)
Data GravityPrimary data consumers are already on AWS or can move easily.
BigQuery DependencyLow usage of proprietary BigQuery features (e.g., BigQuery ML, deeply nested structs).
IAM ComplexitySecurity team understands AWS IAM Roles vs. GCP Service Accounts.
Kubernetes UsageGKE workloads are standard K8s, not heavily reliant on GKE Autopilot specifics.
Egress BudgetBudget allocated for one-time data transfer (unless qualifying for free exit).

What causes GCP-to-AWS migrations to fail?

BigQuery-to-Redshift incompatibility, IAM-model mismatch, and GCP contract or exit costs need separate owners and acceptance tests before workload waves begin. The engineering risks below are assessment prompts, not a quantified breakdown of the project sample.

1. The "BigQuery is just SQL" fallacy

The Trap: Assuming BigQuery SQL will run on Redshift with minor tweaks.

The Reality: BigQuery uses Google Standard SQL and handles nested data (ARRAYs, STRUCTs) natively. Redshift is based on PostgreSQL and typically requires flattening nested data. Functions like ARRAY_AGG behave differently. Migrating 500+ complex queries often takes 3x longer than estimated due to manual rewriting.

2. IAM hierarchy mismatch

The Trap: Trying to map GCP Projects 1:1 to AWS Accounts without rethinking permissions.

The Reality: GCP uses a strict hierarchy (Org -> Folder -> Project) with inheritance. AWS uses a flatter Account model. Simply copying roles leads to "permission explosion" or security gaps. You must redesign your landing zone using AWS Organizations and SCPs (Service Control Policies) to mimic GCP's governance.

3. The egress cost surprise

The Trap: Moving petabytes of data without leveraging "free exit" programs.

The Reality: Moving 1PB of data at standard rates can cost $50,000+. Both Google and AWS have programs to waive egress fees for full migrations, but they have strict eligibility windows (often 60 days) and approval processes. Missing this window destroys ROI.


Which technical differences require redesign?

Five GCP-to-AWS differences usually require design work rather than service substitution: analytics architecture, regional networking, Kubernetes operations, messaging semantics, and workload identity. Treat each mapping as an architecture decision with performance, security, and operating-model acceptance criteria.

1. BigQuery vs. Redshift Architecture

BigQuery separates compute and storage completely. Redshift (provisioned) couples them more tightly, though Redshift Serverless is bridging the gap.

  • Risk: Performance degradation on Redshift if distribution keys and sort keys aren't optimized. BigQuery doesn't need indexes; Redshift relies on them.
  • Prevention: Perform a deep data profiling exercise. Identify join patterns to select the right Distribution Styles (KEY, EVEN, ALL) in Redshift.

2. Networking & VPCs

GCP VPCs are global; subnets span regions. AWS VPCs are regional.

  • Risk: Broken connectivity for multi-region applications.
  • Prevention: Re-architect network topology. You will need VPC Peering or AWS Transit Gateway to connect VPCs across regions, which adds complexity compared to GCP's global VPC.

3. Kubernetes (GKE vs. EKS)

GKE is widely considered the "gold standard" of managed Kubernetes. EKS is powerful but requires more "assembly."

  • Risk: Operational overhead increase. GKE automates master upgrades and node repairs more aggressively than standard EKS.
  • Prevention: Use EKS Managed Node Groups and consider tools like Karpenter for autoscaling to match GKE's efficiency.

4. Pub/Sub vs. Kinesis/SQS/SNS

GCP Pub/Sub is a global, unified messaging service. AWS splits this into Kinesis (streams), SQS (queues), and SNS (topics).

  • Risk: Architectural complexity. You can't just "replace" Pub/Sub with one AWS service.
  • Prevention: Map use cases carefully. Use Kinesis for high-throughput ingestion, SQS for decoupling microservices, and SNS for fan-out notifications.

5. Identity Federation

GCP Service Accounts are first-class identities. AWS uses IAM Roles assumed by resources.

  • Risk: Hardcoded keys. Developers might try to generate long-lived access keys for AWS to mimic Service Account keys.
  • Prevention: Enforce the use of IAM Roles for EC2 (Instance Profiles) and IRSA (IAM Roles for Service Accounts) in EKS. Ban long-lived access keys.

What is the GCP-to-AWS migration roadmap?

A GCP-to-AWS program typically moves through discovery and TCO, AWS landing-zone design, data migration, and application cutover. The sequence keeps identity and network controls ahead of workload replication and reserves parallel running for evidence-based acceptance tests.

Phase 1: Discovery & TCO (Weeks 1-4)

Inventory all GCP resources. Map dependencies. Calculate AWS TCO including support and data transfer. Apply for egress waivers.

Phase 2: Landing Zone & Security (Weeks 5-8)

Build AWS Control Tower. Configure AWS Organizations. Map GCP IAM roles to AWS IAM policies. Set up Direct Connect or VPN.

Phase 3: Data Migration (Weeks 9-16)

Use AWS DMS for databases. Use Storage Transfer Service for GCS to S3. Begin BigQuery to Redshift schema conversion and data load.

Phase 4: App Migration & Cutover (Weeks 17-24)

Deploy apps to EKS/EC2. Point to new data sources. Run parallel environments. Perform DNS cutover (Route53).


What does a GCP-to-AWS migration cost?

The 58-project sample spans $400K to $4M, with a $1.4M median. The business case depends on committed-use penalties, data egress, dual-running duration, warehouse conversion labor, AWS support, and the savings available through workload consolidation.

Cost CategoryGCP (Current)AWS (Future)Migration Bubble Cost
ComputeSustained Use Discounts apply automatically.Savings Plans require 1-3 year commit.Parallel run cost (1-3 months).
Data WarehouseBigQuery (pay-per-query or slots).Redshift (provisioned nodes or serverless).Schema conversion labor + dual run.
EgressHigh inter-region costs.Similar, but free within AZs (mostly).High risk: One-time transfer fees.
SupportGoogle Cloud Support.AWS Enterprise Support (tiered).Overlap period.

Break-even: Typically Month 18-24, driven by operational consolidation and AWS credits (MAP program).


How does the target architecture change?

The target architecture replaces GCP service boundaries with AWS equivalents, but the mapping is rarely one-to-one. Compute, analytics, networking, messaging, and identity need separate decisions so a nominal service replacement does not import the wrong operating model.

Before (GCP)

  • Compute: GKE Autopilot, Cloud Run
  • Database: Cloud SQL (Postgres), BigQuery
  • Storage: Google Cloud Storage (Multi-region)
  • Identity: Cloud Identity, Service Accounts

After (AWS)

  • Compute: EKS (Managed Node Groups), AWS Fargate
  • Database: RDS for PostgreSQL (Aurora), Redshift / Athena
  • Storage: Amazon S3 (Intelligent Tiering)
  • Identity: IAM Identity Center, IAM Roles

How to Choose a Migration Partner

If you need a complete "lift and modernize": Mission Cloud or Caylent. These firms are AWS-exclusive or highly specialized, bringing deep engineering talent that can refactor applications, not just move VMs.

If you are a Global 2000 enterprise: Accenture or Deloitte. You need a partner who can handle the organizational change management, compliance, and massive scale of thousands of applications, often bundling business transformation with the technical move.

If you need ongoing management: Rackspace Technology. If your goal is to shut down your data center or GCP footprint and have someone else run the ops on AWS, their managed service model is ideal.

Red flags when evaluating vendors:

  • "We have a tool that does 100% of the conversion." (Lie. BigQuery to Redshift always requires manual optimization.)
  • No mention of Egress Waivers. (They should be guiding you through the AWS MAP program and Google's exit policies to save you money.)
  • Weak IAM answers. (If they can't explain the difference between a GCP Project and an AWS Account governance model, run.)

How We Select Vendors

We analyzed 40+ migration firms based on:

  • AWS Competency: specifically the "Migration Competency" and "Data & Analytics Competency".
  • Case Studies: Proven track record of moving complex data workloads (PB-scale) from GCP.
  • Engineering Depth: Ability to refactor code (Python, Java, Go) to run natively on AWS services, not just rehosting.

Vetting Process:

  1. Analyze partner case studies for specific "GCP to AWS" examples.
  2. Verify AWS Competency status and partner tier.
  3. Evaluate their "Redshift vs. BigQuery" technical whitepapers or engineering blogs to assess depth.
  4. Exclude generalist IT shops that lack specific cloud-native migration tooling.

What else should buyers know about GCP-to-AWS migration?

GCP-to-AWS buyers most often need clarity on schedule, platform economics, BigQuery conversion, data egress, IAM, and migration tooling. The answers below distinguish project-level evidence from workload-specific decisions that still require assessment.

How long does a GCP to AWS migration take?

For a mid-sized enterprise (50-200 VMs, 10TB data), expect 4-6 months. Large enterprises with petabytes of data and complex dependencies often take 12-24 months. The timeline is heavily dictated by the "refactor" vs. "rehost" strategy.

Is AWS cheaper than GCP?

Not necessarily on a unit basis. GCP's sustained use discounts are automatic, while AWS requires committed use (Savings Plans) to match pricing. However, AWS often offers better price-performance for specific workloads like Graviton (ARM) compute and tiered storage.

Can I migrate BigQuery directly to Redshift?

No. There is no "direct" copy. You must export data to GCS, transfer to S3, and load into Redshift. Schema conversion is required because BigQuery uses nested data types that Redshift handles differently. AWS Schema Conversion Tool (SCT) helps, but manual work is required.

Does Google charge for data egress when migrating to AWS?

Usually, yes. However, Google Cloud has a program to waive egress fees if you are completely leaving the platform and terminate your contract. You must apply for this and complete the move within a specific window (typically 60 days).

What is the biggest technical risk?

Identity management (IAM). GCP's project-based hierarchy is fundamentally different from AWS's account-based model. Failing to map this correctly results in a security nightmare where users have too much access or applications break.

What tools help with GCP to AWS migration?

Key tools include AWS Application Migration Service (MGN) for lift-and-shift, AWS Database Migration Service (DMS) for SQL databases, AWS Schema Conversion Tool (SCT) for data warehouses, and AWS DataSync for object storage transfer.


Risk Factors

BigQuery to Redshift SQL Incompatibility

BigQuery's nested data structures and proprietary SQL functions do not map 1:1 to Redshift, requiring significant manual refactoring.

IAM Model Mismatch

GCP's project hierarchy doesn't exist in AWS. Mapping permissions to AWS Accounts/Roles requires a complete security redesign.

Egress Cost Traps

Moving petabytes of data out of GCP triggers massive egress fees unless you qualify for and strictly follow the 'free exit' program.


Feasibility Analysis

Ideal candidates

  • GCP usage is primarily compute and storage with minimal BigQuery or Vertex AI dependency
  • AWS enterprise agreement offers meaningful cost reduction vs GCP pricing
  • Team already has AWS certification or AWS-heavy infrastructure elsewhere

Break-even cost: $150k/year in cloud cost savings Talent risk: Medium. GCP-specific skills (Spanner, BigQuery) need retraining to AWS equivalents.

The numbers

Verified benchmarks for GCP to AWS Migration: Cost, Timeline & Decision Guide, aggregated from analyzed projects. Figures are ranges, not point estimates.

Cost

$400k$4Mmedian $1.4M
GCP to AWS Migration: Cost, Timeline & Decision Guide cost range. Cost range: $400k to $4M, median $1.4M.

Timeline

036mo10 months
GCP to AWS Migration: Cost, Timeline & Decision Guide timeline. Timeline: 10 months.

Success rate

658074%
GCP to AWS Migration: Cost, Timeline & Decision Guide success rate. Success rate: 74% across 58 analyzed projects.

Vendor pool

GCP to AWS Migration: Cost, Timeline & Decision Guide benchmark figures
Cost range$400k – $4M
Median cost$1.4M
Median timeline10 months
Success rate74%
ComplexityMedium
Typical ROI12–18 months
Projects analyzedn=58

The business case

Typical ROI

12–18 months

Cost avoidance

$80k–$400k/year depending on workload profile

Key drivers

  • AWS enterprise agreement pricing for compute-heavy workloads
  • Vendor consolidation and simplified billing
  • Access to larger AWS partner ecosystem and talent market
  • AWS regional coverage in markets where GCP presence is thin

Should you migrate?

A decision framework for GCP to AWS Migration: Cost, Timeline & Decision Guide — the conditions that favor migrating, the ones that argue against it, and the alternatives worth weighing first.

Migrate if

  • AWS pricing or enterprise agreement offers cost savings vs GCP
  • Organization is standardizing on AWS across all regions/divisions
  • Workloads don't depend on GCP-specific ML services (Vertex AI, BigQuery)

Don't migrate if

  • BigQuery, Vertex AI, or Google Workspace are mission-critical dependencies
  • Team has deep GCP expertise with no AWS skillset
  • GCP committed-use discounts are in place and create exit penalties

Alternatives to consider

Alternatives to GCP to AWS Migration: Cost, Timeline & Decision Guide
AlternativeWhyBest for
Multi-cloud (GCP + AWS)Keep GCP for data/ML workloads (BigQuery advantage), AWS for computeOrganizations with distinct data analytics and application workloads
GCP cost optimizationCommitted-use contracts and right-sizing before switchingCost-driven migrations where GCP bill is reducible without leaving

Recommended Partners

C
Caylent

High-end cloud native engineering and complex data migrations.

Best for: Tech-forward companies needing deep engineering talent.

50 case studies
Accenture logo
Accenture

Massive scale migrations with 'Cloud First' strategy and industrial tooling.

Best for: Global 2000 enterprises with complex compliance needs.

500 case studiesEnterpriseGlobal
Slalom logo
Slalom

Agile, local-market focus with strong AWS relationship.

Best for: Enterprises wanting a collaborative, high-touch partnership.

300 case studiesEnterpriseUSA / Global
Rackspace Technology logo
Rackspace Technology

Managed migration services with deep multi-cloud operational expertise.

Best for: Companies needing ongoing managed services post-migration.

500 case studiesEnterpriseGlobal
Capgemini logo
Capgemini

Industrialized migration factory model for large application portfolios.

Best for: Large-scale legacy app modernization to AWS.

350 case studiesEnterpriseGlobal (France HQ)
Deloitte logo
Deloitte

Strategic business transformation coupled with technical migration.

Best for: Migrations driven by M&A or major business restructuring.

300 case studiesEnterpriseGlobal
Wipro logo
Wipro

FullStride Cloud Services with automated migration accelerators.

Best for: Cost-sensitive large enterprises needing speed and scale.

350 case studiesEnterpriseGlobal
Infosys logo
Infosys

Cobalt assets for automated code conversion and data migration.

Best for: Risk-averse enterprises prioritizing standardized processes.

550 case studiesEnterpriseGlobal (India HQ)
SoftServe logo
SoftServe

Deep software engineering roots for refactoring during migration.

Best for: ISVs and product companies moving platforms to AWS.

250 case studiesEnterpriseGlobal (Ukraine Origins)
M
Mission Cloud

AWS Premier Partner with dedicated 'Mission Move' migration methodology.

Best for: Mid-market to Enterprise complete lift-and-shift + modernization.

100 case studies

Related Migrations

Peter Korpak

Chief Analyst, Software Modernization Intelligence · 10+ years B2B market research

Last reviewed:

58 projects analyzed