Hygraph Pricing Overview

The API is really easy to use and has most everything you need to quickly and easily add on a frontend. The support staff has been really helpful through all stages of development and the documentation is quite good.

The only thing I can say here is that the 25000 record cap on the mid-tier pricing feels like it might be a bit limiting for scalability depending on the marketability and success of the project. It feels though that this would only be an issue if the project has a lot of user engagement which could balance out the costs. I will say though that for any system that needs less than 25000 records the pricing is quite reasonable for the quality of product and ease of implementation that you receive from the product.

I am using GraphCMS for rapid prototyping of products, the ease in which I can get up and running with a backend is amazing and it allows me to present working prototypes to my clients quickly and affordably.

Everthing, it works really well and is highly intuitive.

The pricing tiers! Much better to offer a pay monthly amount for smaller developers like myself, that provide sites for small concerns/clients. For example, Netlify charge me 19 dollars a month for all the services I need. The price hike from free tier to $299 a month per project is insane.

It solves the problem of over-complicated bloated CMS platforms i've used in the past.

Hygraph allows users to customize content templates, styles, and formats to suit their specific needs and brand guidelines, providing flexibility and creative control over the generated content.

free API limit is 1 M .which can be utilized in less time. Users may have concerns about the cost or pricing structure of Hygraph, as it may require a financial investment that may not be feasible for all budgets or business sizes.

it offers collaboration features that allow teams to work together on content creation projects, facilitating communication, coordination, and feedback among team members. This can help improve team productivity and streamline content creation workflows for businesses with multiple content creators or stakeholders.

The UI is really nice and professional looking. I like that you can customise and organise the sidebar. Their API SDK uses TypeScript so it's essentially self documenting. Performance is pretty good once things are cached but awful when not. The SWR Cache customisation is nice. The ACL system is really thorough and very extensible. Localisation is good and the UI for it is good.

Pagination is limited to 100 when every other competitor has 250 to 1,000 and it's a little frustrating because it cannot be updated. The rate limits are also harsh (even when you're using your own private cluster they insist on some limits). I hit rate-limits when testing locally, by myself and hadn't even sent any traffic yet. They don't support proper image optimisation with a provide like Imgix or even Cloudflare image resizing. The free tier is very limiting which makes it hard for you to evaluate the product and they won't let you evaluate it properly without signing you up in a yearly contract if you need more models to evaluate it properly. Other Headless CMS's allow you to have more models and you only need Enterprise after you're sending enterprise level traffic. The sales team will essentially tell you that everything is possible, everything is fast, the dedicated cluster can handle unlimited traffic, the rate limits are non-existent - until you sign for a 1 year contract of 2,000/mo and suddenly reality hits after you send real traffic. If you want to extend it by adding users or locales you first have to speak to the sales team and wait for a contract amendment just to increase a number that most systems allow you to do in an admin panel. They'll try to upsell those users and locales to save money when it's $60/user instead of $10/user. When you have pay-as-you-go pricing models like AWS where you pay for exactly what you use, I hate when companies push you into large contracts up-front and make you pay before you can properly evaluate it. It's like going to a club, asking if it's busy inside and only after paying, realising that it's actually empty. In systems like Builder.io I'm able to make my project grow in small increments by increasing the required page views, bandwidth and users without having to sign a contract for a year before I need it. It makes the relationship feel sour and predatory. Unfortunately our previous CTO signed for it and then they wouldn't let us cancel the contract so we're paying for it and have since moved on.

Headless CMS with multi-tenancy and localisation for serving millions of users. The ACL system is great for allowing lots of users and picking exactly what they're able to see and edit.

Pre-built UI for building a GraphQL-enabled schema. Content editor for those who will input data. We don't need to create a backend.

Very limited if your project is growing. Pricing is abhorrent. You pay 300 for 50 models, then 500 more for another 25. And it's the same number of components.

It's a good concept, but they're super stingy with resources.

Headless content management system which meets and exceeds our performance needs Powerful API and ecosystem support Smooth UX with the ability to do bulk operations Support for Role-based and Content-based permissions Supports GraphQL, a loosely coupled server-client model for faster development Cloud-hosted, scalable, reliable, highly available with the ability to snapshot and restore data Cost-efficient and simple licensing model

We have not discovered anything yet which we dislike in the product.

We were looking for a central storage system for our Video on Demand streaming platform, using which distribution of metadata to different consumption points (internal and external) becomes easy. It solved many drawbacks of legacy systems i.e. - It is not heavy, in-house, and monolith system - It does not bulky UX which supports single operations - It is not one of the slow-moving and expensive development cycles product

GraphCMS has to be the most feature-complete GQL based CMS out there. Drop any preconceptions you may have about out-of-the-box solutions and give it a spin - the depth this product has is incredible and the support from Fabian is phenomenal, even at 8.30pm on a Friday evening. The free tier quotas are extremely generous for testing purposes and you could easily run a small project with no costs. The pricing scheme is well documented and extremely generous considering the A* support they give, the amount of effort gone into their documentation and the knowledge of their staff.

Webhooks are locked behind the paid tier, which, if you rely on them, requires you to take a dive into your wallet to access. That being said, now that we're ready to scale, it's a non-issue. Some CMS focus more on the author experience so if you're looking for a headless blogging platform such Ghost, you may not find what you want here. Saying that, I would 100% recommend trying it before coming to any conclusions.

With JAMstack becoming ever more popular, we tasked ourselves with building a scalable, revenue-driving app with minimal overheads and effort required. GraphCMS was integral to this and as is definitely our go-to choice!

The project setup is very straight-forward, and all process done on the Hygraph dashboard, we don't need to install any package to start the project. Other features I love the most, such as seamless integration with Next Js and even Hygraph provides rich text renderer for React to help us render smoothly in the front-end.

I hope Hygraph create new pricing to afford, because the paid version cost hundred of dollars

Hygraph helps full stack developer and content creator to set up backend service without headache so we can start project faster