Turbopuffer vs Weaviate
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 Weaviate 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
- Turbopuffer offers more deployment options
- Turbopuffer is more cost-effective
- Weaviate has more permissive licensing
- Weaviate has 1 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.
Weaviate
Weaviate is a cloud and self-hosted vector database offering hybrid dense+sparse search, strong metadata filtering, and a modular storage layer. It is designed for enterprise and production RAG workloads that require flexibility and scalable cloud hosting.
Feature Comparison
Infrastructure & Technical Details
| Feature | Turbopuffer | Weaviate |
|---|---|---|
| Deployment | BYOC, Managed Cloud | Self-Hosted, Managed Cloud |
| Cost | Minimum commitment $64/month | Free (self-host), cloud starts ~$25/mo |
| License | Proprietary | BSD |
| Index Types | SPFresh | HNSW, Hybrid dense+sparse |
| Cloud Providers | AWS, GCP, Azure | AWS, GCP |
| Regional Flexibility | high | low |
| Strengths Count | 7 | 8 |
| Weaknesses Count | 7 | 6 |