Managed Postgres
Supabase vs Neon for managed Postgres
Both products run Postgres, but they solve different product jobs. Supabase bundles database, auth, storage, realtime, and edge functions. Neon centers elastic Postgres compute, scale behavior, and database branching.
The short answer
Choose Supabase when auth, storage, realtime, and a coordinated backend platform remove meaningful integration work. Choose Neon when database branching and elastic Postgres compute are the primary requirements.
Compare the options
Compare the options that fit this decision
| Compared | Supabase | Neon |
|---|---|---|
| 2 vCPU example | $75/mo, 2 vCPU, 4 GB | $154.76/mo at 2 CU for 730 hours, about 2 vCPU, 8 GB |
| Compute behavior | Provisioned size | Serverless CU-hours |
| What you get | Database plus backend services | Serverless Postgres platform |
| Branching | Available | Core workflow |
What changes the answer
What changes the answer
- 01Compare the database resources actually used, not the entry headline.
- 02Value bundled services only when the application will use them.
- 03Model active compute hours for Neon and the steady compute size for Supabase.
- 04Test connection behavior, extension needs, and recovery requirements.
Bill and sources
At these inputs: the same formula, assumptions and sources every visitor sees.
Choose Supabase when auth, storage, realtime, and a coordinated backend platform remove meaningful integration work. Choose Neon when database branching and elastic Postgres compute are the primary requirements.
Formula
Database TCO = compute + storage + egress + backups + bundled-service replacement cost + database operations labor
Assumptions
- Supabase Pro compute credit applied
- Neon compute active for 730 hours
- Storage added separately where not included
Explicit unknowns
- Actual Neon active compute hours
- Value of Supabase bundled services
- Workload-specific connection behavior
Sources and freshness
- Supabase pricing checked
- Neon pricing checked