5 ms·
New T3 Instances – Burstable, Cost-Effective Performance
- babaganoosh89 8y agoI hope this gets Google Cloud to expand their burstable offering.
- brad0 8y agoHow does this compare price wise with t2 instances? It specifies how cheap the t3s can be but not the difference between t2 and t3.
- gregdunn 8y agoYou can find pricing details at https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/on-demand/ https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/on-demand/ Pricing varies from region to region, on-demand vs. reserved instance, etc. The general answer is they are cheaper than the same sized t2 version. (Disclosure: I work at AWS, not posting in an official capacity)
- deathanatos 8y agoThe blog post mentions this: > If the instance runs at higher CPU utilization for a prolonged period, there will be an additional charge of $0.05 per vCPU-hour. But that (rather important detail) seems to have been omitted from the pricing page?
- gregdunn 8y agoFarther down the page it talks about T2 Unlimited pricing, which is the same thing here. It does look like it needs to be updated to include details for T3 as well, however. I'll submit some feedback to the documentation team about getting that updated. (Disclosure: Not posting in an official capacity)
- philliphaydon 8y agoWill these be available for RDS?
- rcaught 8y agoAn RDS T2 is not an EC2 T2. Just named similar.
- philliphaydon 8y agoExcept T3 would imply newer underlying hardware.
- gregdunn 8y agoI don't have any insider knowledge on this, so your guess is as good as mine on this one :) If you have an account manager or solutions architect, they can probably help you connect with the right people to ask for details, though. (Disclosure: Still not posting in an official capacity)
- robax 8y agoBaseline pricing looks about 10% cheaper for workloads that won't trigger lots of bursting. This looks like a good a choice for services that aren't CPU bound.
- marcinzm 8y ago>If the instance runs at higher CPU utilization for a prolonged period, there will be an additional charge of $0.05 per vCPU-hour. This seems to be the same as the T2 unlimited instances. Interesting that it's now the default and only (?) option.
- gregdunn 8y agoIt's not the only option - it can be disabled, the same as on T2 instances. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/t2-unlimited.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/t2-unlim... has documentation on disabling it. (Disclosure: I work at AWS, not posting in an official capacity)
- sciurus 8y agoI'm very glad they changed the default to unlimited. The old default behavior of throttling was a just an outage waiting to happen, and it was more painful to opt into unlimited via Cloudformation than it should have been.
- rubbingalcohol 8y agoI'm not sure I understand, they're basically selling you less than one continuous CPU thread and upcharging if you use a full core? So suppose the machine has 56 cores and they're putting 3 customers on each vCPU. What happens in the case that everyone needs to burst to the full performance of each thread they're paying for (56 * 3)? I imagine they'd price that as if you utilized 100% but give you degraded performance due to hardware limitations. Please correct me if I'm wrong but this sounds like "unlimited shared hosting for people who can SSH" (except you pay extra instead of unlimited)
- wmf 8y agoWhat happens in the case that everyone needs to burst to the full performance of each thread they're paying for (56 3)? I imagine they'd price that as if you utilized 100% but give you degraded performance* There's no reason to assume that. The hypervisor can track how much time each VM actually executed and subtract credits appropriately. AWS pricing is generally high enough that they don't need to use undocumented gotchas. I would say it's more like shared hosting with full AWS API and ecosystem compatibility. Shared hosting for people who can SSH is Digital Ocean.
- jaytaylor 8y agoWhen I first read this headline I had a flashback to the late 90's / early 2000's. It was a time when the term "T3" unambiguously meant only one thing: a blazing fast, very expensive, dedicated network connection! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-carrier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-carrier Then a few years later the even fatter optical pipes came along - OC1 and OC3 lines. My, how times change! ..Well, some things do. If you want a T3 line, they're still available, and today will cost you in the neighborhood of $3,000USD/month (down from $10-15K/month around Y2K). What a bargain :) https://www.google.com/search?q=how+much+does+a+t3+line+cost https://www.google.com/search?q=how+much+does+a+t3+line+cost
- newman314 8y agoI had the same exact thought except OC192 popped into my head =)
- exikyut 8y agoWow, 45-90Mbps for $3k-$6k/mo.
- MichaelApproved 8y agoIt's not only about the throughput, it's also about the SLA and sustainable throughput.
- chillidoor 8y agoWhen I started my IT career in South Africa the internet situation was pretty horrendous. ADSL/Broadband speeds were 384kbps and you had hard bandwidth caps of ~$7 per gigabyte of traffic on top of your line rental. Companies and universities could, however, cough up for expensive alternatives, such as a diginet line which the ISP I worked for at the time offered. These guaranteed uptime (which was very appealing as ADSL outages were very common) but you paid a hell of a lot of money per 64kbps of uncapped bandwidth. You were looking at something like $400-$500 a month per 64k for the cheapest support package. And we weren't even the most expensive. There was a law firm that was paying something like $30k a month for their pimped out 2048kbps line. Thank God things have improved dramatically there in the last decade (at least in terms of internet speeds).
- fovc 8y agoLooking at 1yr reserved fully upfront pricing, the price cuts were ~9% across the board (except 10% for micro and 7% for nano). This seems like a big improvement for nano, micro, and small which now have 2 vCPUs and the same credits and memory as before. However, the larger instances are stuck with the same vCPUs and memory, but less than half the CPU credits!
- jacob019 8y agoDoes 2 vCPUs on the nano get us twice the CPU cycles for multi-threaded workloads? Regretting my 3-year non-convertible t2.nano reserved instances.
- antaviana 8y agoThe 9% decrease is only for Linux. For Windows, there is a significant price increase. For example, for Windows (VPC), a t3.2xlarge reserved for 1 year is a 19.21% more expensive than a t2.2xlarge.
- benologist 8y agoAWS nets $20+ million a day in profit so these new machines will probably help us save like Amazon warehouse workers save on toilet breaks by pissing in bottles.
- King-Aaron 8y agoDid anyone listen to the 'Amazon Polly' audio that accompanied the article? I haven't used any of Amazons text-to-speech apps before now, but I found it a little creepy with the way it "inhales" between sentences... Also, it pronounces "Gigabyte" as "Gibabyte" and "Ji-be-bies" (2:55). This made me giggle.
- andrewstuart 8y agoSo what would be the benefit of running a T3 nano instance over a T2 nano instance? The price is almost the same. Is T3 faster?
- BeeOnRope 8y agoDo these instances support AVX-512?
- kennydude 8y agoBursting can cost up to an extra $37.5/month per instance. Bettrer make sure you keep an eye on that CPU usage
- blasdel 8y agoYou only start getting billed long after your instance would have been throttled in the Standard model (or if you terminate with a surplus balance) If your CPUCreditBalance didn't normally get near zero before it's mostly just insurance against grey failures. It also makes the credit model radically easier to reason about.