4 ms·

Short answer: no. Long answer: When you consider ARM vs AMD vs Intel vs current-gen vs last-gen, AWS sells several 8-core 32-GB machines that have wildly varyi

Short answer: no. Long answer: When you consider ARM vs AMD vs Intel vs current-gen vs last-gen, AWS sells several 8-core 32-GB machines that have wildly varying performance characteristics. It used to be that the manner of virtualization impacted performance, too. I think that might be less the case now. To know if you're getting good value, you really need to try a few different vendors and benchmark then, either with real workloads or synthetic ones.

ctvo 4y ago
> When you consider ARM vs AMD vs Intel vs current-gen vs last-gen, AWS sells several 8-core 32-GB machines that have wildly varying performance characteristics. This is actually a benefit of AWS and other large public clouds. You have a choice due to their size. If AWS's investment in Gravitron design works well for your workload, it's a ~30% cost savings. They're able to invest in designing and producing the chips due to their size. A company like fly.to is limited in selection and heavy R&D.
- cldellow 4y ago
  Sure, I personally like the Graviton instances. For workloads that care more about throughput than latency, they offer excellent performance-per-price. The OP was asking what was "most comparable" to Fly's offering. I assumed they meant "what would similar performance cost elsewhere". By switching from Intel to ARM, they're buying something fundamentally different. Maybe it's a better fit overall! But I didn't understand that to be what they were asking.
  - ctvo 4y ago
    I think we're on the same page. I only wanted to further contrast for readers the difference between something like fly.to and AWS. There's a lot of pros / cons, and one of them is selection. I wasn't sure what the dedicated instances for fly.io were running on (can't find it on this page: https://fly.io/docs/about/pricing/#plans https://fly.io/docs/about/pricing/#plans). To truly do an apples / apples compare there's networking capabilities, storage, and other considerations also.

ctvo 4y ago

> When you consider ARM vs AMD vs Intel vs current-gen vs last-gen, AWS sells several 8-core 32-GB machines that have wildly varying performance characteristics. This is actually a benefit of AWS and other large public clouds. You have a choice due to their size. If AWS's investment in Gravitron design works well for your workload, it's a ~30% cost savings. They're able to invest in designing and producing the chips due to their size. A company like fly.to is limited in selection and heavy R&D.

cldellow 4y ago
Sure, I personally like the Graviton instances. For workloads that care more about throughput than latency, they offer excellent performance-per-price. The OP was asking what was "most comparable" to Fly's offering. I assumed they meant "what would similar performance cost elsewhere". By switching from Intel to ARM, they're buying something fundamentally different. Maybe it's a better fit overall! But I didn't understand that to be what they were asking.
- ctvo 4y ago
  I think we're on the same page. I only wanted to further contrast for readers the difference between something like fly.to and AWS. There's a lot of pros / cons, and one of them is selection. I wasn't sure what the dedicated instances for fly.io were running on (can't find it on this page: https://fly.io/docs/about/pricing/#plans https://fly.io/docs/about/pricing/#plans). To truly do an apples / apples compare there's networking capabilities, storage, and other considerations also.