AWS S3 is best for storing static assets, while CloudFront accelerates their delivery by caching content at edge locations, and using both together will make you site blazing fast.
March 6, 2025
Photo by Conny Schneider on Unsplash
If you're hosting images, videos, JavaScript, CSS, or other static files for your web app, you might be wondering: Should I use AWS S3 or CloudFront?
While both services help deliver content efficiently, they serve different purposes.
Let’s break it down.
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is a cloud-based object storage service where you can store files like images, videos, HTML, and CSS.
It provides high durability, scalability, and availability, making it ideal for storing static assets.
Amazon CloudFront is a content delivery network (CDN) that speeds up the delivery of static and dynamic content by caching it in multiple locations worldwide.
Instead of every user fetching files from a single S3 bucket, CloudFront serves them from edge locations closer to the user.
S3 Alone? If your website has low traffic and users are close to your AWS region, serving files directly from S3 is fine.
CloudFront Alone? Not possible—you need an origin (usually S3) to serve files.
S3 + CloudFront? Best for high-traffic or global users. Store assets in S3 and use CloudFront to cache them at edge locations for faster delivery.
Purpose:
Performance:
Cost:
Security:
If you need simple storage, go with S3.
If you want faster load times and global distribution, use CloudFront with S3 as the origin.
For most production websites, combining both services provides the best performance and scalability.