Managed relational databases · November 2026 Edition
Google Cloud SQL vs Supabase
Two of fourteen models named Google Cloud SQL first on the direct prompt; zero named Supabase. Google Cloud SQL was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Supabase by twelve and Google Cloud SQL carries 73 labels and Supabase 24, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in two categories this edition.
Named in three categories this edition.
First-choice share8%8%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate16%12%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#5A position in a field of 11; printed, not drawn.
Labels7324A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Google Cloud SQL reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Amazon RDS was named alongside these two in thirteen of the fourteen direct answers. Amazon RDS vs Google Cloud SQL · Amazon RDS vs Supabase · Azure SQL Database vs Google Cloud SQL
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the managed relational databases page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Google Cloud SQLFirst choices, of fourteen modelsSupabase
Direct20
Paraphrase002 against Supabase
Comparative10
Budget-constrained243 against Google Cloud SQL
Scale-constrained00
Negative009 against Google Cloud SQL · 1 against Supabase
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Google Cloud SQL and Supabase were named in the same answer sixty-nine times, of the 192 answers naming Google Cloud SQL and the 95 naming Supabase. In those answers Supabase took the first choice twenty-two times and Google Cloud SQL seven.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Google Cloud SQL and Supabase stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | | | |
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | |||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | | | |
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | | |
| Mistral Small | | | | | | |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | | | ||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | | | |
| Kimi K2 | | | | | | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | | |
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | | | |
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | | | |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | | |
Google Cloud SQL Supabase first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Google Cloud SQL on the left and Supabase on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Google Cloud SQL and Supabase stood in it.
Google Cloud SQL first, Supabase not the choice
2 of 14 modelsSupabase was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Claude Haiku 4.5Amazon RDS, Google Cloud SQL alternatives: Azure SQL Database
Grok 4.20Google Cloud SQL alternatives: Amazon RDS, Azure SQL Database
Neither was the first choice, one was named
11 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Gemini 3.5 FlashAmazon Aurora alternatives: AlloyDB for PostgreSQL, Azure SQL Database, CockroachDB Cloud, Google Cloud SQL, Neon, Supabase
Perplexity SonarAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database, CockroachDB, Google Cloud SQL, Supabase
Mistral SmallAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Google Cloud SQL
DeepSeek V4 FlashAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
Llama 4 MaverickAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Google Cloud SQL
Qwen 3.7 FlashAmazon RDS alternatives: Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
Kimi K2Amazon RDS alternatives: Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
GLM 4.7 FlashXAmazon RDS alternatives: Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
MiniMax M2.5Amazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
GPT-6 LunaAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
Muse Glimmer 30BAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
Neither was named
1 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.GPT-5.4 miniAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Supabase leads by twenty-four points.
Supabase29%#1 of 8Google Cloud SQL5%#5 of 8Mid-marketThe figures above
Level: the same share of first choices.
Google Cloud SQL8%#3 of 11Supabase8%#5 of 11Enterprise
The order flips: Google Cloud SQL leads at enterprise.
Google Cloud SQL8%#4 of 8Supabase0%#– of 8What the models said about Google Cloud SQL
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Avoid (or treat with extreme caution): - Google Cloud SQL – accidental deletion risk, limited backup/recovery, low control over storage.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · negative prompt · hard negative
“Why avoid the "Big Three" (AWS, Azure, Google)?” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“Cloud SQL is primarily designed for single-zone or cross-replication setups within a region. It lacks native, synchronous horizontal scaling” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Google Cloud SQL (particularly its Enterprise Plus edition for PostgreSQL) stands out as the best managed relational database service for most mid-market B2B companies” Grok 4.20 · direct prompt · first choice
“Supabase (PostgreSQL) and Google Cloud SQL (PostgreSQL or MySQL) are your best bets” GLM 4.7 FlashX · budget prompt · first choice
“Google Cloud SQL keeps things centralized for those already invested in Google's ecosystem” Claude Haiku 4.5 · comparative prompt · first choice
What the models said about Supabase
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of seven in this category shown.
“can be attractive depending on your architecture, but I'd be more cautious for core production systems” GPT-5.4 mini · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“These are rising for mid-sized B2B but less "enterprise battle-tested" than the big three.” Grok 4.20 · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“Supabase, for example, pauses free projects after inactivity” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“Go with Supabase or Neon if you are building a new web app, want a free tier that lasts months” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“Supabase (PostgreSQL) and Google Cloud SQL (PostgreSQL or MySQL) are your best bets” GLM 4.7 FlashX · budget prompt · first choice
“If you're just starting out: Use Neon (free tier) or Supabase (free tier).” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · first choice
Also compared
Amazon RDS vs Google Cloud SQLAmazon RDS vs SupabaseAzure SQL Database vs Google Cloud SQLAzure SQL Database vs SupabaseGoogle Cloud SQL vs Amazon AuroraGoogle Cloud SQL vs DigitalOcean Managed DatabasesGoogle Cloud SQL vs NeonAmazon Aurora vs SupabaseSupabase vs DigitalOcean Managed DatabasesSupabase vs NeonAll twenty-one head-to-head pages and the full managed databases standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.