Turbopuffer vs Chroma
Compare deployment options, cost efficiency, and features to choose the right vector database for your application.
Database Comparison
Turbopuffer takes the lead.
Both Turbopuffer and Chroma are powerful vector databases designed for efficient similarity search and storage. However, their deployment options and features differ in important ways.
Why Turbopuffer:
- Turbopuffer ranks higher overall
- Chroma has more permissive licensing
- Chroma has 3 more strengths
Turbopuffer
⭐Turbopuffer is a fully managed cloud vector database built around a centroid-optimized SPFresh index. It is designed for extremely low-cost, large-scale storage, leveraging object storage engines like S3, GCS, or Azure Blob.
Chroma
Chroma is a lightweight, local-first vector database designed for fast prototyping and flexible on-device or self-hosted RAG workflows. It supports efficient in-memory and SPANN search modes, making it ideal for local experimentation and small to medium RAG systems.
Feature Comparison
Infrastructure & Technical Details
| Feature | Turbopuffer | Chroma |
|---|---|---|
| Deployment | BYOC, Managed Cloud | Self-Hosted, Managed Cloud |
| Cost | Minimum commitment $64/month | Free (local), Chroma Cloud starts at $0 with $5 free credits |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0 |
| Index Types | SPFresh | HNSW, SPANN |
| Cloud Providers | AWS, GCP, Azure | Any |
| Regional Flexibility | high | medium |
| Strengths Count | 7 | 10 |
| Weaknesses Count | 7 | 7 |