3 ms·
No, the cost of a Fargate vCPU is just higher compared to EC2. An EC2 t3.small instance costs about 2 cents/hour and a similar configuration on Fargate costs ab
by shitlord 4y ago
No, the cost of a Fargate vCPU is just higher compared to EC2. An EC2 t3.small instance costs about 2 cents/hour and a similar configuration on Fargate costs about 9 cents/hour. For m6i.large and c6i.large instances, the disparity isn't as bad but it's still 15%-20% more expensive.
There are a few different reasons we're using Fargate. Like the other commenter mentioned, there's the lambda max run time. Our Fargate tasks also have a few sidecar containers running alongside the main services. The ECS Exec integration is also nice for poking around when things aren't working correctly.
- OJFord 4y agoOf course it is, if it were cheaper then it would always win over EC2 for container workloads. This is why I said it's a matter of usage - it's worth paying more per unit time if it's running less and more sporadically making it cheaper over all.
- shitlord 4y agoI don't disagree about usage, but a 300% upcharge over a burstable EC2 instance is not reasonable from a pricing perspective. Fargate should allow users to specify their compute requirements beyond just vCPU count and GB memory.