4 ms·
>> If you have a static load, AWS is really expensive. Again without details, this a meaningless claim. My own company's only infrastructure is a website that
by StreamBright 7y ago
>> If you have a static load, AWS is really expensive.
Again without details, this a meaningless claim. My own company's only infrastructure is a website that "runs" on AWS using the free tier of Cloudfront and a little bit of the paid tier of S3. This is a static workload. It is really cheap. Without adding all the details on both sides and the workload you cannot claim that AWS (or for that matter any cloud vendor) is more expensive.
- bifrost 7y agoIf you can find cases where its cheap, thats great, but its not the case for a lot of people with static compute load. One of my example datacenters is: Private servers, access controlled, etc 12 servers (E5-2438L, 128GB of ram, 6T of RAID in each, 10gbps interconnects/etc) It costs $1200/month to run. Just the storage cost in AWS is around $3k/monthly. The equivalent EC2 cost is around $14k/monthly. It requires around 1-2 hours/month of oversight and the costs are generally fixed except for the bandwidth which is billed at a fraction of the cost of AWS pricing.