3 ms·

Also, consider physical servers from providers like Hetzner. These can be several times cheaper than EC2.

• papaf 6y ago
  I use Hetzner for quite a lot for personal projects and can recommend them for reliability and predictable costs. I've done reasonably high CPU tasks like compiling Android images on the larger Cloud instances. However, this morning I was playing around with Scaleway bare metal [1] and General Purpose instances [2] -- I am thinking of making a switch for high CPU tasks. [1] https://www.scaleway.com/en/bare-metal-servers/ https://www.scaleway.com/en/bare-metal-servers/ [2] https://www.scaleway.com/en/virtual-instances/general-purpose/ https://www.scaleway.com/en/virtual-instances/general-purpos...
  • jwr 6y ago
    Interesting! These look very good indeed. I will have to try them. The main point is that physical servers are much cheaper than VMs and provide significantly better performance as well (see my benchmarking and comparison: https://jan.rychter.com/enblog/cloud-server-cpu-performance-comparison-2019-12-12 https://jan.rychter.com/enblog/cloud-server-cpu-performance-...).
• pluc 6y ago
  I worked on an unrelated market study - look at Upcloud and Raptr as well.
• GordonS 6y ago
  I was just looking at Hetzner yesterday, looking to host a HA Postgres setup. Their block storage volumes look interesting, but I couldn't find any information on performance guarantees, or even claims. Anyone have an idea about performance (IOPS or MB/s)?
  • StavrosK 6y ago
    I use them but don't have that info off the top of my head. However, you can easily make an account, get a VPS with a volume and benchmark it in a few minutes for a few cents.
    • jwr 6y ago
      Note that we are talking about two different things here: a VPS is not the same thing as a dedicated server. I only use their dedicated servers with NVMe SSDs and have never benchmarked the I/O.
      • StavrosK 6y ago
        Right, but the GP was talking about the network volumes AFAICT.