A snippet from the blog post: > This chart shows CPU operation in AWS (t2.2xlarge with 8 virtual cores) at different times after several idle CPU periods. Woul

A snippet from the blog post: > This chart shows CPU operation in AWS (t2.2xlarge with 8 virtual cores) at different times after several idle CPU periods. Would you expect such unpredictable CPU behavior within a single cloud provider? > [image showing extremely bursty CPU performance] In AWS EC2, the T-series are burstable instances types that have a low base performance, and use a credit system to offer bursts above that baseline. In exchange for this credit limit, T-series instances are less expensive than instances with consistent CPU performance. They are marketed for use cases where applications often sit idle, and work well in that case. Pointing out erratic performance in a benchmark as a problem (a problem with all of EC2, at that!) is incorrect -- the machine is working exactly as its advertised to work. See here for more info: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/burstable-performance-instances.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/burstabl... Edit: I see later on in the article they talk about burstable instances and their performance impact (so why make such a novice mistake!?). However, Google Cloud's E2 instance series is price-competitive with AWS's burstable T-series, and doesn't have complexities and pitfalls associated with bursting. That wasn't mentioned, despite this article literally being a comparison between what the platforms have to offer in terms of compute.