StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Application & Data
  3. Infrastructure as a Service
  4. Load Balancer Reverse Proxy
  5. F5 BIG-IP vs Google Cloud Load Balancing

F5 BIG-IP vs Google Cloud Load Balancing

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

F5 BIG-IP
F5 BIG-IP
Stacks50
Followers64
Votes0
Google Cloud Load Balancing
Google Cloud Load Balancing
Stacks50
Followers45
Votes0

F5 BIG-IP vs Google Cloud Load Balancing: What are the differences?

Introduction

F5 BIG-IP and Google Cloud Load Balancing are both popular solutions for achieving high availability and scalability in web applications. However, there are key differences between these two platforms that can affect their suitability for specific use cases. In this article, we will explore six important differences between F5 BIG-IP and Google Cloud Load Balancing.

  1. Deployment Model: F5 BIG-IP is an on-premises solution that requires physical hardware or virtual instances to be deployed within the organization's data center. On the other hand, Google Cloud Load Balancing is a cloud-based service provided by Google Cloud Platform (GCP), which allows for easy scalability and flexibility in the deployment of load balancers.

  2. Managed Service vs. Self-Managed: Google Cloud Load Balancing is a fully managed service, meaning that Google takes care of the underlying infrastructure, updates, and maintenance. This allows developers and DevOps teams to focus on their applications without worrying about managing the load balancer itself. In contrast, F5 BIG-IP requires self-management, including configuration, maintenance, and updates, which may require specialized skills and resources.

  3. Global Load Balancing Capability: Google Cloud Load Balancing offers built-in global load balancing, allowing traffic to be intelligently distributed across multiple regions around the world. This enables efficient and reliable distribution of workloads, especially for globally distributed applications. F5 BIG-IP, on the other hand, requires additional configuration and setup to achieve global load balancing, potentially increasing complexity and deployment time.

  4. Integration with Cloud Native Services: While both F5 BIG-IP and Google Cloud Load Balancing provide traditional load balancing capabilities, Google Cloud Load Balancing also seamlessly integrates with other Google Cloud services such as Kubernetes Engine, Compute Engine, and App Engine. This integration allows for more seamless deployment, scaling, and management of applications within the Google Cloud ecosystem, making it an attractive choice for organizations already using GCP services.

  5. Pricing Model: F5 BIG-IP follows a traditional licensing model, where organizations purchase a license based on the number of instances or capacity required. This can result in upfront costs and potential hardware investments. Google Cloud Load Balancing, on the other hand, follows a usage-based pricing model, where organizations pay for the specific resources used, allowing for more flexibility and scalability while potentially reducing costs.

  6. Ease of Use and Learning Curve: Google Cloud Load Balancing is known for its user-friendly interface and intuitive configuration options, making it relatively easy to set up and manage. F5 BIG-IP, on the other hand, may require a higher level of technical expertise and training to fully leverage its capabilities, as it offers a more extensive set of features and customization options.

In summary, F5 BIG-IP and Google Cloud Load Balancing differ in their deployment models, management approach, global load balancing capability, integration with cloud native services, pricing models, and ease of use. Organizations should carefully consider their specific requirements and preferences to choose the load balancing solution that best fits their needs.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Detailed Comparison

F5 BIG-IP
F5 BIG-IP
Google Cloud Load Balancing
Google Cloud Load Balancing

It ensures that applications are always secure and perform the way they should. You get built-in security, traffic management, and performance application services, whether your applications live in a private data center or in the cloud.

You can scale your applications on Google Compute Engine from zero to full-throttle with it, with no pre-warming needed. You can distribute your load-balanced compute resources in single or multiple regions, close to your users and to meet your high availability requirements.

-
Autoscaling; No pre-warming needed
Statistics
Stacks
50
Stacks
50
Followers
64
Followers
45
Votes
0
Votes
0
Integrations
No integrations available
Kubernetes
Kubernetes
Google Cloud Platform
Google Cloud Platform

What are some alternatives to F5 BIG-IP, Google Cloud Load Balancing?

HAProxy

HAProxy

HAProxy (High Availability Proxy) is a free, very fast and reliable solution offering high availability, load balancing, and proxying for TCP and HTTP-based applications.

Traefik

Traefik

A modern HTTP reverse proxy and load balancer that makes deploying microservices easy. Traefik integrates with your existing infrastructure components and configures itself automatically and dynamically.

AWS Elastic Load Balancing (ELB)

AWS Elastic Load Balancing (ELB)

With Elastic Load Balancing, you can add and remove EC2 instances as your needs change without disrupting the overall flow of information. If one EC2 instance fails, Elastic Load Balancing automatically reroutes the traffic to the remaining running EC2 instances. If the failed EC2 instance is restored, Elastic Load Balancing restores the traffic to that instance. Elastic Load Balancing offers clients a single point of contact, and it can also serve as the first line of defense against attacks on your network. You can offload the work of encryption and decryption to Elastic Load Balancing, so your servers can focus on their main task.

Fly

Fly

Deploy apps through our global load balancer with minimal shenanigans. All Fly-enabled applications get free SSL certificates, accept traffic through our global network of datacenters, and encrypt all traffic from visitors through to application servers.

Envoy

Envoy

Originally built at Lyft, Envoy is a high performance C++ distributed proxy designed for single services and applications, as well as a communication bus and “universal data plane” designed for large microservice “service mesh” architectures.

Hipache

Hipache

Hipache is a distributed proxy designed to route high volumes of http and websocket traffic to unusually large numbers of virtual hosts, in a highly dynamic topology where backends are added and removed several times per second. It is particularly well-suited for PaaS (platform-as-a-service) and other environments that are both business-critical and multi-tenant.

node-http-proxy

node-http-proxy

node-http-proxy is an HTTP programmable proxying library that supports websockets. It is suitable for implementing components such as proxies and load balancers.

Modern DDoS Protection & Edge Security Platform

Modern DDoS Protection & Edge Security Platform

Protect and accelerate your apps with Trafficmind’s global edge — DDoS defense, WAF, API security, CDN/DNS, 99.99% uptime and 24/7 expert team.

DigitalOcean Load Balancer

DigitalOcean Load Balancer

Load Balancers are a highly available, fully-managed service that work right out of the box and can be deployed as fast as a Droplet. Load Balancers distribute incoming traffic across your infrastructure to increase your application's availability.

GLBC

GLBC

It is a GCE L7 load balancer controller that manages external loadbalancers configured through the Kubernetes Ingress API.

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

GitHub
Bitbucket

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Kubernetes
Rancher

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

gulp
Grunt

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Graphite
Kibana

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana