7 ms·
Also gives you 224 physical CPU cores (448 logical cores). Requires a 3-year reservation, and "the effective hourly rate for the All Upfront 3-Year Reservation
by packetslave 8y ago
Also gives you 224 physical CPU cores (448 logical cores).
Requires a 3-year reservation, and "the effective hourly rate for the All Upfront 3-Year Reservation for a u-12tb1.metal Dedicated Host in the US East (N. Virginia) Region is $30.539 per hour."
Works out to $267,512.88 per year, or $802,538.64 for the 3-year term. I wonder how that compares to building your own on-premise host with that much RAM (obviously, there's operational costs to consider as well).
Also, don't miss the last line: "We’re not stopping at 12 TiB, and are planning to launch instances with 18 TiB and 24 TiB of memory in 2019."
- danbruc 8y agoThis [1] is the closest thing I could quickly find, so I guess we are talking on the order of $250k to own one. [1] https://www.thinkmate.com/system/superserver-7088b-tr4ft https://www.thinkmate.com/system/superserver-7088b-tr4ft
- _wmd 8y agoAt this size calculating power consumption is probably important, it's definitely no longer insignificant
- qaq 8y agoeven at 1K per month it would add 36K doesn't change the equation much
- NedIsakoff 8y agoThat's 8 nodes with 1 CPU each.
- danbruc 8y agoThere is one daughter board per socket but it is a single system.
- nikkwong 8y agoCrazy. Is the use case for these types of instances pretty much designated for ML? Why else would anyone need these?
- danbruc 8y agoI don't think machine learning would be a good use case for such a machine, you probably want GPUs or TPUs for that.
- trynumber9 8y agoDatabase with the entire data set in memory?
- lelf 8y agoFrom the page: >> SAP HANA in Minutes > The EC2 High Memory instances are certified by SAP for ⟨…⟩ [SAP HANA keeps everything in RAM.]
- abraham_lincoln 8y agoMy redis is bigger than your redis?
- regularfry 8y agoAny time you might think "I need a Hadoop cluster for this!" is now less likely to be correct.
- aquadrop 8y ago
- sehugg 8y agoI could grep the heck out of some log files on that.
- TheDong 8y agoI know you're joking, but that operation is often disk-io bound, not cpu or memory bound... and the disk is still EBS, you'll not get much better performance on that than on an m5.xlarge I bet, unless you use a grep regex that needs to gobble lots of data into memory as part of the search.
- ohazi 8y agoWith that much memory, a ramdisk would seem completely reasonable.
- KindOne 8y agotmpfs would solve the disk-io
- justinsaccount 8y ago> that operation is often disk-io bound the first time.. 12TB can cache a lot of logs.
- oconnor663 8y agoIt's disk-bound the first time you run grep, but the second time you run it the log file is going to be in memory, if you have enough memory.
- glandium 8y agoWhich brings the interesting question: what kind of entity would pay Amazon $800K upfront for 3 years of using a single (massive) machine?
- mmt 8y ago> $802,538.64 for the 3-year term. I wonder how that compares to building your own on-premise host with that much RAM This was discussed a couple days ago in a different thread [1], when 4TB was the EC2 limit. $400k for the current-gen (224 cores) or, as a sibling comment [2] notes, $250k for the previous CPU generation (which can use twice as many DIMMs of half the density and only 192 cores of that). > obviously, there's operational costs to consider as well We can estimate an upper bound on this, given that the current-gen system has N+2 5x1600W 96% efficient PSUs, so 5kW max. If you're paying a colo $.50/kWh, that's another $66k over 3 years worst case. Realistically, though, CPUs with a max TDP of 1640W, DIMMs (generously) 700W, leaves plenty of room for fans, SSDs and other overhead before getting to 3kW or $40k, and that's still assuming running full-bore the whole time. There are obviously also ancillary costs to AWS, such as data transfer and EBS. If you're already running your own hardware, it sure does look more attractive to pay $400k now and $40k over 3 years than to pay AWS $800k All Up Front (now). If not, perhaps it's more attractive to hand-wave away that $360k as saving the "hassle" of hiring someone who knows how to run equipment in a datacenter. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18041486 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18041486 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18089267 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18089267
- packetslave 8y agoOne thing missing from this analysis is the networking cost. The EC2 instance comes with 14gb/sec of dedicated EBS bandwidth and 25gb/sec of network bandwidth. That implies a 40gb NIC, which will require a 40gb top of rack switch and enough cross-sectional bandwidth in the datacenter fabric to handle however many of these machines they plan for (at whatever oversubscription ratio, if any). That's a pretty non-trivial amount of expense to setup a network with enough capacity to support a machine like this fi you want to do it yourself.
- mmt 8y ago> That implies a 40gb NIC It may imply that but only outright requires 40Gb/s total, which is provided by the "4-port 10GBase-T Ethernet SIOM (Intel® X550 controller)" of a SuperServer 7089P-TR4T. The EBS bandwidth can be elided entirely by using local storage instead. Local storage bandwidth can be much cheaper than ethernet, especially considering how many NVMe ports are already included. As 10GE is maybe $200/port (including SFPs), at scale, network cost doesn't "move the needle" on a $400k server.