A year into the budget-tier price war, the two aggressors meet again — what changed on each rate card, and what didn’t.
Winner depends on your workload.
Winner depends on: whether your traffic is big and simple enough for BlazingCDN’s flat volume tiers, or varied enough that Bunny’s broader network and platform features earn back their small premium.
Side by side
| Bunny | BlazingCDN | |
|---|---|---|
| Model | Region-priced Standard + flat Volume tier | Flat, region-agnostic volume tiers |
| Published rates | $0.01/GB NA/EU; Volume $0.005/GB → $0.002 at PB scale | ~$4/TB at 25 TB, sliding to $2/TB at 2 PB+ |
| Requests | Not billed | Not billed |
| Network | 119 PoPs Standard / 10 Volume | Smaller footprint, selectable locations |
| Platform | Storage, Stream, Optimizer, Edge Scripting, Shield, DNS | Delivery-focused; no general edge compute |
| Founded | 2015, Slovenia | 2020 |
| Buyer profile | Startups to mid-market, feature-hungry | High-volume, cost-first delivery |
Why a rematch
When we first compared these two, the story was a challenger undercutting an incumbent-in-the-making. A year of open price war later, the story has matured: both vendors now anchor the budget tier’s floor, both publish rates the hyperscalers cannot approach, and each has sharpened the argument for its own model. Our original BlazingCDN vs Bunny comparison stands for the fundamentals; this piece is about what the year changed.
The rate cards after a year of war
Bunny’s published posture in mid-2026: Standard network from $0.01/GB in North America and Europe rising to $0.03–$0.06/GB across Asia, the Middle East, Africa and South America, and the Volume network — ten high-capacity PoPs — at a flat $0.005/GB for the first 500 TB, sliding toward $0.002/GB at petabyte scale, all on a $1/month minimum with no request fees. BlazingCDN’s counter is radical simplicity: one flat, region-agnostic rate per volume tier — vendor-published figures run around $4/TB at 25 TB/month, sliding to roughly $3/TB at 500 TB and $2/TB at multi-petabyte commitments — also without request fees.
Worked example at 100 TB/month with a 60/30/10 NA/EU/APAC split: Bunny Standard blends to roughly $0.012/GB ≈ $1,200; Bunny Volume, if the ten-PoP footprint suits the workload, ≈ $500; BlazingCDN’s published tier lands near $350–400. The flat model wins the spreadsheet — provided the traffic is the kind that suits it. Figures checked against both providers’ published pricing, July 2026; BlazingCDN’s performance and client claims are vendor-published and worth validating in a trial.
What the flat rate trades away
Region-agnostic pricing is a bet that your traffic doesn’t need the expensive places, or needs them lightly. Bunny’s 119-PoP Standard network exists precisely for the workloads that do: latency-sensitive assets for globally spread audiences, where in-market presence in São Paulo or Johannesburg is the product. BlazingCDN’s leaner, selectable footprint suits software distribution, video libraries and update fleets — big objects, throughput-bound, tolerant of a few extra milliseconds. The price war has not changed that structural difference; it has only made ignoring it cheaper.
The platform gap, one year wider
One more thing the year clarified: support and evidence postures. Bunny’s scale — tens of thousands of customers, a long public track record on independent latency indices — makes its claims easy to check from third-party data. BlazingCDN, five years old and privately benchmarked, asks buyers to take more on trust: its uptime figures, enterprise references and performance numbers are published on its own blog rather than by independent monitors. That is not disqualifying — challengers always start there — but it changes your evaluation duty: insist on a production-mirroring trial and your own measurements before moving meaningful traffic.
The clearest divergence of the year is scope. Bunny kept shipping platform: edge storage with free transfer into the CDN, the Stream video product, image optimization, DNS, a hardening security layer, and edge scripting maturing out of beta. BlazingCDN stayed deliberately narrow — delivery, done cheaply, without a general-purpose compute runtime. For a team that wants one vendor for storage-plus-delivery-plus-video, that scope is worth real money; for a team that wants tonnage moved at the lowest flat rate, the narrowness is the feature. The same platform-versus-pipe split runs through Bunny vs KeyCDN from the other direction.
How to decide
Run both trials against your real object-size histogram and geography — at these prices the test costs almost nothing. Choose BlazingCDN when your delivery is high-volume, large-object and NA/EU-weighted, and the invoice is the KPI. Choose Bunny when your audience map is wide, your roadmap touches video or storage, or you want the bigger network as insurance. And whichever you pick, keep the loser’s quote: in the budget tier, last year’s price is never this year’s price.
Running a budget-tier bake-off? The assessment benchmarks both networks on your traffic shape before you commit.