Tech Matchups: Global Accelerator vs CloudFront
Overview
AWS Global Accelerator improves performance for TCP/UDP traffic by routing users to the nearest AWS edge location with static anycast IPs.
CloudFront is a CDN that caches HTTP/HTTPS content at edge locations, optimizing content delivery with low latency.
Both enhance global performance: Global Accelerator for non-HTTP traffic, CloudFront for content delivery.
Section 1 - Traffic Type and Protocols
Global Accelerator routes TCP/UDP traffic—e.g., directing VoIP traffic to an NLB with minimal latency. Uses static IPs for consistent addressing.
CloudFront handles HTTP/HTTPS traffic—e.g., caching a website’s images from an S3 bucket. Supports dynamic and static content.
Scenario: Global Accelerator for a gaming app’s TCP traffic; CloudFront for a video streaming site’s HTTP content.
Section 2 - Performance Optimization
Global Accelerator leverages AWS’s private network, routing traffic via edge locations—e.g., reducing latency from 100ms to 40ms for a European user. Supports health checks and failover.
CloudFront caches content at 300+ edge locations, achieving ~90% cache hit ratios—e.g., serving a 10MB video in ~50ms. Integrates with WAF for security.
Scenario: Global Accelerator ensures low-latency database sync; CloudFront delivers cached web assets instantly.
Section 3 - Cost and Scalability
Global Accelerator charges per hour ($0.025 in us-east-1) and data transfer ($0.025/GB). Example: 1TB/month costs ~$111 ($36 hourly + $75 data).
CloudFront charges per data transfer ($0.085/GB out) and requests ($0.0075/10K). Example: 1TB/month with 10M requests costs ~$162.50.
Both scale globally: Global Accelerator to millions of connections, CloudFront to petabytes of content.
Scenario: Global Accelerator for steady TCP traffic; CloudFront for bursty HTTP traffic.
Section 4 - Use Case Scenarios
Global Accelerator suits low-latency apps—e.g., real-time analytics or IoT device communication over TCP/UDP.
CloudFront fits content-heavy apps—e.g., e-commerce sites or media streaming with HTTP/HTTPS content.
Scenario: Global Accelerator for a fintech app’s UDP traffic; CloudFront for a news site’s articles.
Section 5 - Comparison Table
| Aspect | Global Accelerator | CloudFront |
|---|---|---|
| Protocols | TCP/UDP | HTTP/HTTPS |
| Optimization | Low Latency | Content Caching |
| Cost | Hourly + Data | Data + Requests |
| Security | Health Checks | WAF Integration |
| Best For | Non-HTTP Apps | Content Delivery |
Global Accelerator for non-HTTP performance, CloudFront for HTTP content. Choose based on protocol and use case.
Conclusion
Global Accelerator and CloudFront optimize global traffic with distinct strengths. Global Accelerator enhances TCP/UDP performance, ideal for latency-sensitive apps like gaming or IoT. CloudFront excels in HTTP/HTTPS content delivery, perfect for web or media applications.
Weigh protocols (TCP vs. HTTP), optimization (latency vs. caching), and cost (hourly vs. requests). Use Global Accelerator for non-HTTP, CloudFront for content—or combine: Global Accelerator for app backend, CloudFront for frontend assets.