Platform Comparisons

Gameye vs. the alternatives

No egress fees. No lock-in. No DevOps overhead. See how Gameye compares to every major game server platform.

Choosing a game server platform is a long-term infrastructure decision. The wrong choice means egress bills you didn't model, matchmaker integrations you have to build from scratch, or Kubernetes clusters your team has to maintain. The comparisons below cover what actually matters: total cost, matchmaker compatibility, uptime guarantees, and operational overhead.

Gameye vs.
AWS GameLift

GameLift charges egress fees on top of compute — typically adding 40–60% to your bill. Gameye includes egress at no extra charge. Both platforms run dedicated servers at scale, but GameLift locks you into AWS infrastructure while Gameye is provider-agnostic.

  • Gameye: no egress fees — GameLift: per-GB egress charges
  • Gameye: $0.07/vCPU/hr — GameLift: FlexMatch + hosting bundled pricing
  • Gameye: multi-provider — GameLift: AWS-only
Full comparison: Gameye vs. AWS GameLift →
Gameye vs.
Unity Multiplay
Shutting down March 31 2026

Unity Game Server Hosting (Multiplay) ends March 31, 2026. Your Matchmaker, Relay, and Lobby are unaffected — only the dedicated server fleet layer needs to move. Gameye replaces the hosting layer with provider-agnostic orchestration at $0.07/vCPU/hr, no egress fees, and sandbox access in 24 hours.

  • Gameye: works alongside Unity Matchmaker — no matchmaking rewrite
  • Gameye: no egress fees, ~0.5s session start
  • Gameye: provider-agnostic — not locked to a single operator
Unity Multiplay migration guide →
Gameye vs.
Hathora
Shutting down May 5th 2026

Hathora is shutting down its game server platform on May 5th, 2026 and has pivoted to AI inference. Gameye is the only straightforward migration path for studios using Pragma Engine, Nakama, PlayFab, or FlexMatch — all four are natively integrated.

  • Gameye: official Pragma Engine Capacity Provider
  • Gameye: native Nakama, PlayFab, FlexMatch integration
  • Gameye: games-only platform, 7 years and 120M+ sessions
Full comparison: Gameye vs. Hathora → Hathora migration guide →
Gameye vs.
Agones

Agones is open-source and "free" — but running it in production requires a Kubernetes cluster, a DevOps engineer, and ongoing maintenance. Gameye handles all of that. The total cost of self-managed Agones often exceeds a managed platform once engineering time is factored in.

  • Gameye: fully managed — Agones: self-hosted Kubernetes
  • Gameye: 0.5s server start — Agones: minutes for pod scheduling
  • Gameye: 99.99% SLA — Agones: no SLA (your cluster, your uptime)
Full comparison: Gameye vs. Agones →
Gameye vs.
Edgegap

Edgegap focuses on edge placement and charges on a capacity-reservation model. Gameye is provider-agnostic — it places sessions across bare metal and cloud and bills per second with no reservation requirements. For studios that need global coverage without upfront commitments, the models differ significantly.

  • Gameye: per-second billing, no reservations
  • Gameye: bare metal + cloud, automatic failover
  • Gameye: $0.07/vCPU/hr published — Edgegap: custom quotes
Full comparison: Gameye vs. Edgegap →

What makes Gameye different

No egress fees

Every competitor either charges egress or doesn't publish pricing. Gameye includes bandwidth — $0.07/vCPU/hr is the total compute cost.

Matchmaker-native

Official integrations with Pragma Engine, Nakama, PlayFab, and FlexMatch. The allocation handoff is documented and production-tested, not a custom gRPC project.

Fully managed

No Kubernetes to operate, no cluster to scale, no on-call rotation for infrastructure. Gameye handles placement, failover, and capacity across providers.

Proven at scale

120M+ sessions orchestrated, 1M peak concurrent users, 99.99% contractual SLA. Chivalry 2 ran 250,000 players on launch day without downtime.

Sandbox access provisioned within 24 hours.

Get started →

Not sure what you'll pay? Estimate your costs →