4 ms·
Save $69k sounds a lot more significant than save 38%. If you're going to be using the server less than 73% of the time, AWS sounds better.
by Thorrez 8y ago
Save $69k sounds a lot more significant than save 38%.
If you're going to be using the server less than 73% of the time, AWS sounds better.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- BGZq7 8y agoKeep in mind, the AWS cost is already for a reserved instance. On-demand would cost more.