> ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.springwinter.dev/llms.txt > Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further. # Porter vs Springwinter: Customer-Cloud PaaS Compared > Compare Porter and Springwinter for customer-cloud deployment, including Kubernetes, AWS ownership, workloads, data services, previews, and cost. Porter and Springwinter both provide PaaS workflows while placing infrastructure in the customer's cloud account. Porter builds on managed Kubernetes across AWS, GCP, or Azure. Springwinter uses a curated set of AWS services without creating a Kubernetes cluster. *Updated October 9, 2026.* **Choose Porter for Kubernetes portability and extensibility; choose Springwinter for a narrower AWS-native operating model.** ## What Porter does well Porter makes customer-owned Kubernetes approachable. Its documentation says it provisions infrastructure directly in a connected cloud account and manages the cluster, network, load balancer, registry, and node groups. Porter supports web services, workers, scheduled jobs, and one-off jobs. Deployments can start from GitHub, an OCI image, or `porter.yaml`. It also supports autoscaling, logs, metrics, deployment history, pull-request previews, custom Helm charts, and persistent storage. On AWS, Porter can provision Postgres and Redis options, including RDS or Aurora and ElastiCache. This is valuable when Kubernetes is a desired platform capability rather than accidental complexity. **Porter combines PaaS usability with access to the Kubernetes and Helm ecosystems.** ## What Springwinter does well Springwinter connects through a customer-created IAM role protected by an external ID. It deploys supported resources into the customer's AWS account, where the customer retains ownership and pays AWS directly. The resource model includes GitHub-built ECS web servers and long-running workers, S3 and CloudFront static sites, RDS databases, Valkey caches, and private S3 storage. Springwinter also provides previews, logs, metrics, deployment history, and cost views. Springwinter does not create a Kubernetes cluster. A web service remains an ECS workload, a static site remains S3 plus CloudFront, and relational data remains RDS. **Springwinter preserves recognizable AWS service boundaries while removing their repeated deployment plumbing.** ## The important insight: cluster platform versus service control plane Porter converges applications onto Kubernetes node groups. That foundation offers broad workload primitives, Helm compatibility, and cloud choice. It also introduces a cluster control plane, baseline nodes, Kubernetes upgrades, and cluster-level capacity decisions. Springwinter orchestrates defined AWS services through delegated IAM access. This avoids a cluster layer but does not provide Kubernetes APIs, arbitrary Helm workloads, or multi-cloud portability. This is not a difference in who understands infrastructure. Porter deliberately standardizes on Kubernetes. Springwinter deliberately uses direct AWS service boundaries. ## Comparison | Area | Porter | Springwinter | | - | - | - | | Infrastructure | Customer AWS, GCP, or Azure | Customer AWS account | | Compute | Managed Kubernetes | ECS for supported services | | Workloads | Web, workers, scheduled and one-off jobs | Web servers and long-running workers | | Static sites | Applications through Kubernetes | Dedicated S3 and CloudFront resource | | Data | Postgres and Redis options | RDS and Valkey | | Extensibility | Helm and Kubernetes ecosystem | Curated AWS resource catalog | | Previews | Isolated PR environments and add-ons | Preview deploys for supported resources | | Observability | Logs, metrics, deployment history | Logs, metrics, history, and cost views | | Kubernetes | Required and managed by Porter | Not deployed | | Billing | Porter plus cloud-provider charges | AWS charges plus current Springwinter pricing | ## Choose Porter when * Kubernetes is part of the intended architecture. * You need AWS, GCP, or Azure deployment choice. * Helm charts, custom cluster workloads, or Kubernetes scheduling are requirements. * Your team accepts cluster baseline infrastructure and platform fees. ## Choose Springwinter when * AWS is the deliberate target. * You want ECS, S3, CloudFront, RDS, and Valkey without Kubernetes. * Direct AWS ownership, billing, and cost allocation are central. * The curated resource catalog fits the application. ## Limits to understand Porter's default cluster has baseline infrastructure cost before application growth, and some data capabilities are more complete on AWS. Springwinter is AWS-only and cannot run arbitrary Helm charts or unsupported AWS architectures. Compare the complete production topology, support model, regional availability, and monthly cost rather than only the first deployment. ## Frequently asked questions Yes. Porter provisions and manages infrastructure in the customer's AWS, GCP, or Azure account. The cloud provider bills the infrastructure, while Porter charges separately for its platform according to current pricing and requested application resources. For supported AWS workloads, Springwinter removes the need to deploy Kubernetes by using ECS and other native services. It is not a replacement for Kubernetes APIs, Helm charts, operators, or arbitrary cluster workloads. Porter has the stronger multi-cloud model because it can provision Kubernetes on AWS, GCP, or Azure. Springwinter intentionally targets AWS services. Kubernetes still does not make provider-specific networks, databases, storage, and operations automatically interchangeable. ## Sources and further reading * [Porter introduction](https://docs.porter.run/getting-started/introduction) * [Porter cloud accounts](https://docs.porter.run/cloud-accounts/overview) * [Porter concepts and service types](https://docs.porter.run/getting-started/concepts) * [Porter preview environments](https://docs.porter.run/preview-environments/overview) * [Porter infrastructure pricing](https://docs.porter.run/cloud-accounts/pricing) * [Porter pricing](https://www.porter.run/pricing) This documentation is built and hosted on [Mintlify](https://mintlify.com), a developer documentation platform.