Aura - Compute vs Storage

I have an exercise I'm considering (an enhanced MusicBrainz Neo4j db).
I want to avoid having to manage the database, but I envisage my model will have a lot of nodes and edges, periodic updates, but I don't anticipate actually running that many queries and those that I do run will not be very involved.
Are there any plans to split the compute vs storage costs for the managed service the way that Snowflake does? The combined model I'm seeing at the moment actually makes it more attractive to use AWS, at least from a cost point of view.

Jack, hello, it's good to hear from you.

We accept new feature requests of this type on the Feedback wall for Aura, which you can access via the top menu of Aura at and which I have linked directly here: Feature Requests | Neo4j.

We are continually reviewing the priority of our roadmap against the requests on this wall and your input there would be much appreciated.

To answer your question directly, it's not currently a priority to separate out, and have the ability to tune CPU/RAM/Storage independently of each other.