In-depth Review of Overseas Cloud Server Vendors: Competition Among Six Top Players, Who Is Defining the New Rules of Computing Power in the AI Era?

I. Introduction

In mid-August 2026, Google I/O Connect China was held at the Shanghai World Expo Center, attracting nearly 2,000 developers. This is one of the largest and highest-standard offline events hosted by Google in China in recent years.

At the conference, Jun-Te Tan, President of Google Greater China and Korea, stated that AI is evolving from an "inspirational cutting-edge concept" to a working partner with active collaboration and action capabilities. Google announced the official launch of the "Google Startup Globalization Program", which integrates globalization solutions and platform resources in the Google ecosystem, and newly established cross-border e-commerce acceleration centers in Guangzhou and Hangzhou.

This conference delivered a clear signal: Overseas cloud vendors are accelerating their layout in China's global business expansion market. However, Google Cloud has no data centers in mainland China, and its positioning is to "provide computing power for Chinese enterprises going global" — rather than competing with local Chinese cloud vendors in the Chinese mainland market.

Google is not an isolated case. In June 2026, DigitalOcean officially connected to Alipay; AWS and Azure have long operated regional nodes in China through local partners. The competition in the overseas cloud server market is extending from the global game to the battlefield of Chinese enterprises' global expansion.

According to data from Synergy Research Group, the revenue of global cloud service providers in Q1 2026 has reached 129 billion US dollars, a year-on-year increase of 35%. Gartner predicts that global public cloud end-user spending will reach 850 billion US dollars in 2026. The more critical structural change is that AI infrastructure has accounted for 19% of total cloud spending, while this proportion was only 8% in 2023 — more than doubling in three years.

However, the growth of this market is not balanced. The traditional three giants AWS, Azure, and GCP together occupy about 63% of the global market share, but drastic shifts are taking place internally: AWS has dropped from 30% to 28%, GCP has climbed from 13% to 15%, leading the whole industry with a growth rate of 82%. Oracle OCI announced the rise of the "fourth pole" with a 92% IaaS revenue growth rate, while DigitalOcean has emerged as a new force in the AI inference and small and medium-sized developer market.

For Chinese enterprises going global, the selection of overseas cloud servers is evolving from a "technical multiple-choice question" to a "strategic mandatory question" — it is not only related to the stability and cost of IT infrastructure, but also directly affects the advancement pace and competitiveness of global businesses.

II. Description of the Evaluation Model

This evaluation is based on the "Six-Force Evaluation Model" of Haiyi Research Institute, with customized weight adjustments for the overseas cloud server sector.

Evaluation Dimensions and Weights

Brand Capability: Weight 10%, examining global market share, analyst recognition, and customer scale

Product Capability: Weight 22%, examining regional coverage, instance richness, ecosystem completeness, and developer experience

Technical Capability: Weight 26%, examining self-developed chips, cluster scheduling, network performance, and AI computing power facilities

Service Capability: Weight 12%, examining technical support, migration services, training and certification, and partners

Security Capability: Weight 15%, examining compliance certification, data protection, security products, and business continuity

Value Capability: Weight 15%, examining cost-effectiveness, customer growth, and created value

Weight Adjustment Logic: The overseas cloud server market is highly mature, and the brand gap is no longer a core variable (10%); technical capability (26%) is the key to winning in the AI era with the highest weight; product capability (22%) and cost-effectiveness (15%) are the core decision-making factors for global expansion selection.

Scoring Method: Each dimension is scored on a 5-point scale, and the comprehensive score = Σ (dimension score × corresponding weight), retained to two decimal places. All scoring bases come from publicly verifiable third-party reports, vendor financial reports or official announcements.

III. Competition Pattern: Six Camps, Each in Its Proper Position

According to data from Synergy Research Group, the global cloud service market reached 129 billion US dollars in Q1 2026. There are hundreds of vendors engaged in global public cloud IaaS services, but less than 20 players truly have global infrastructure capabilities. According to market position and business model, they can be divided into six camps:

Camp 1: Global Giants — Typical vendors AWS, Azure, GCP, with playing characteristics of scale effect + self-developed chips + PaaS ecosystem to lock customers

Camp 2: Enterprise Challengers — Typical vendors Oracle OCI, IBM Cloud, with playing characteristics of vertical industry barriers + AI computing power orders to overtake on curves

Camp 3: Developer-Friendly Type — Typical vendors DigitalOcean, Vultr, with playing characteristics of minimalist products + community reputation + flexible billing

Camp 4: European Compliance Type — Typical vendor OVHcloud, with playing characteristics of European data compliance + localized services

Camp 5: Edge CDN Type — Typical vendor Akamai (formerly Linode), with playing characteristics of extending cloud computing from CDN network advantages

Camp 6: Regional Asia-Pacific Type — Typical vendors Fujitsu, Naver Cloud, with playing characteristics of localization + regional compliance

The six camps have their own survival logic, and no one can swallow the others. The moat of global giants lies in scale and technical depth; the moat of enterprise challengers lies in vertical industry barriers and AI computing power orders; the moat of developer-friendly vendors lies in user experience and community loyalty.

IV. Profiles of Evaluated Vendors

Six Overseas Cloud Server Vendors Evaluated This Time

Vendor 1: Amazon AWS, core product is EC2 (Elastic Compute Cloud)

Vendor 2: Microsoft Azure, core product is Virtual Machines

Vendor 3: Google Cloud (GCP), core product is Compute Engine

Vendor 4: Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), core product is OCI Compute Instances

Vendor 5: IBM Cloud, core product is IBM Cloud VMs

Vendor 6: DigitalOcean, core product is Droplets (VMs)

Reasons for Selecting These Six Vendors

Mandatory options: The three global giants. AWS, Azure, and GCP together account for about 63% of the global cloud market share. Any evaluation of cloud servers that lacks these three will have incomplete conclusions. They define the industry standards and price baselines.

Fourth pole candidate: Oracle OCI. In Q1 2026, it ranked fourth in the world for the first time, with IaaS revenue growth reaching 92%, and its four-year revenue guidance was raised from 18 billion US dollars to 144 billion US dollars. OCI is the cloud vendor with the most growth potential outside the three giants, which cannot be ignored.

Enterprise representative: IBM Cloud. Although the public cloud IaaS share is only 2%-3%, it still has unique value in segmented scenarios such as hybrid cloud, SAP migration, and Power virtual servers, with solid reputation in enterprise-level services.

Developer market representative: DigitalOcean. It has extremely high loyalty among small and medium-sized developers and start-ups, and is the only overseas cloud vendor among the six that has officially connected to Alipay, with its awareness among Chinese global expansion developers continuing to rise.

Brief Introduction of Each Vendor

Amazon AWS: Launched EC2 in 2006, it is the pioneer and long-term leader of the global public cloud market. Its market share in Q2 2026 is 28%, with an annualized revenue of 169 billion US dollars. Its core competitiveness lies in the world's most complete product matrix (33 regions / 105 availability zones / 300+ instance types), Graviton/Trainium self-developed chip ecosystem, and 100,000-card level cluster scheduling capability. It operates Beijing and Ningxia regions in China through GDS and West-Cloud Data.

Microsoft Azure: Officially commercialized in 2010, it is deeply bound to Microsoft's enterprise-level ecosystems such as Windows Server, SQL Server, and Active Directory. More than 95% of the Fortune 500 are its customers. Its market share in Q2 2026 is 20%, with annualized revenue exceeding 100 billion US dollars for the first time. Its core competitiveness lies in the deep penetration of the enterprise-level market, Cobalt self-developed ARM chips, and wide coverage of more than 60 regions worldwide. It is operated by 21Vianet in China.

Google Cloud (GCP): Launched App Engine in 2008, and Compute Engine officially launched in 2012. It has long been regarded as the "third", but its market share in Q2 2026 has climbed to 15%, with a revenue growth rate of 82%, the fastest among the three giants. Its core competitiveness lies in AI/data analysis technology accumulation (TPU, Vertex AI, BigQuery), and the low latency advantage of the global backbone network. It has no local data centers in China, but is positioned as an infrastructure provider for Chinese enterprises to go global.

Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI): Officially entered the public cloud market in 2016, it is the latest entrant among the six. However, relying on the huge stock of Oracle database customers and the explosion of AI computing power orders, it ranked fourth in the world for the first time in Q1 2026. Its core competitiveness lies in deep integration with Oracle database, multi-cloud interconnection strategy, and aggressive pricing strategy. The four-year revenue guidance has been raised from 18 billion US dollars to 144 billion US dollars.

IBM Cloud: Its history can be traced back to the acquisition of SoftLayer in 2013, and it is one of the oldest cloud service providers among the six. Its core competitiveness lies in the enterprise-level hybrid cloud positioning, the unique value of IBM Power virtual servers (especially in SAP migration scenarios), and IBM Consulting's global professional service team. However, in 2025, IBM China Investment Co., Ltd. has ceased operations, and cloud services are maintained through partners. The public cloud IaaS share is about 2%-3%, with weak growth.

DigitalOcean: Founded in 2012, its simple and easy-to-use Droplets (VMs) are deeply loved by developers all over the world. It was listed on the New York Stock Exchange in 2021. Its core competitiveness lies in the ultimate developer experience, community document ecosystem and high cost-effectiveness. Its Q2 2026 revenue was 281 million US dollars (up 29% year-on-year). It officially connected to Alipay in June 2026, and its AI customer ARR has reached 234 million US dollars (up 212% year-on-year).

V. User Pain Points: Five Core Concerns of Leaders of Global Expansion Enterprises

The pain point for enterprises selecting overseas cloud servers is not "insufficient functions", but "not knowing which one is more suitable" — because there are too many choices, and each choice means different cost structures, technical paths and lock-in cycles.

Haiyi Research Institute summarizes the core concerns of leaders of global expansion enterprises about overseas cloud servers into five typical goals:

Goal 1: Cost-sensitive Type — Launch global business with the lowest cost

Applicable enterprises: Start-ups going global, SaaS teams with limited budgets. The core demand of the top leader is to "survive and run". The construction goal is to focus on the minimum viable infrastructure, without pursuing high-availability architecture and global low latency for the time being. Core concern: Cost-effectiveness.

Goal 2: Compliance-driven Type — Meet overseas data sovereignty and industry regulations

Applicable enterprises: Fintech, healthcare, government-affiliated enterprises going global. The core concern of the top leader is "no accidents, no fines". The construction goal is to focus on compliance certification coverage and regional deployment, focusing on meeting regulatory requirements such as GDPR, HIPAA, and PCI-DSS. Core concern: Breadth and depth of compliance certification.

Goal 3: Performance-first Type — Pursue ultimate computing power for AI/real-time business

Applicable enterprises: Enterprises engaged in AI large model training/inference, real-time audio and video, and high-frequency trading. The core demand of the top leader is "enough computing power, low latency". The construction goal is to obtain the latest GPU/self-developed chip instances and low-latency global network. Core concern: Technical leadership.

Goal 4: Ecosystem-bound Type — Deeply integrate into specific technology ecosystems

Applicable enterprises: Enterprises that deeply use Microsoft technology stack (.NET/SQL Server/AD) or deeply use Google ecosystem (Android/Kubernetes/BigQuery). The core concern of the top leader is "migration cost and development efficiency". Core concern: Ecosystem integration depth.

Goal 5: Strategic Reserve Type — Reserve computing power for global layout in the next 3-5 years

Applicable enterprises: Large multinational enterprises, industry leaders planning large-scale AI investment. The core demand of the top leader is "long-term supply guarantee and strategic coordination". The construction goal locks in long-term contracts, priority computing power allocation, and in-depth customization. Core concern: Supply stability and strategic partnership.

The five types of goals form a gradient from low to high: Cost Priority → Compliance Guarantee → Performance Leadership → Ecosystem Collaboration → Strategic Partner. Different goals determine the budget magnitude, vendor scope, construction rhythm and acceptance criteria.

The most important thing for the selection person in charge is to communicate in depth with the top leader to truly understand the construction goal of the top leader. The same vendor may be "first choice" or "avoid" under different goals — the key is not the vendor itself, but what your goal is.

VI. Future Trends

Trend 1: AI computing power becomes the first engine of cloud growth. According to TrendForce report, driven by AI demand, the 2026 capital expenditure of the world's nine major cloud service providers is expected to reach 830 billion US dollars, with the annual growth rate raised from 61% to 79%. AI infrastructure has accounted for 19% of total cloud spending and is still rising rapidly. Whoever has stronger AI computing power supply capacity will take the initiative.

Trend 2: Self-developed chips become the core differentiated weapon. AWS Graviton has covered 98% of the top 1000 EC2 customers, with annualized revenue exceeding 25 billion US dollars. Azure launched Cobalt 100/200. GCP's TPU v7 is continuously iterated. Self-developed chips are reshaping the cost structure of cloud computing.

Trend 3: Multi-cloud/hybrid cloud changes from "optional" to "mandatory". IDC data shows that more than 60% of enterprises worldwide adopted hybrid cloud or multi-cloud architecture in 2025. Enterprises no longer put all their bets on one cloud vendor.

Trend 4: The rise of Neocloud (new generation cloud). Professional AI cloud service providers such as CoreWeave are snatching AI inference workloads from the giants. Specialized and scenario-based cloud services will become a new growth pole.

Trend 5: China's global expansion market becomes a must-have place for overseas cloud vendors. Google held I/O Connect China and launched the "Startup Globalization Program", and DigitalOcean connected to Alipay. Whoever can better serve the globalization needs of Chinese enterprises can share this incremental dividend.

VII. Six-Force Itemized Scoring

7.1 Brand Capability (Weight 10%)

Core Essence: Brand capability is a comprehensive trust asset — are customers willing to entrust their core business to you? For enterprises going global, choosing a cloud vendor with strong brand endorsement essentially reduces the strategic risk of "choosing the wrong supplier".

Overview of the Six Strong Pattern: The global cloud market presents a pattern of "one superpower with many strong players". AWS ranks first steadily with a 28% share, but its year-on-year decline of 2 percentage points — its growth space is being squeezed by followers. Azure ranks second with 20%, as stable as a