▲ | vidarh 6 days ago | |||||||||||||
This is usually only true of you lift and shift your AWS setup exactly as-is, instead of looking at what hardware will run your setup most efficiently. The biggest cost with AWS also isn't compute, but egress - for bandwidth heavy setups you can sometimes finance the entirety of the servers from a fraction of the savings in egress. I cost optimize setups with guaranteed caps at a proportion of savings a lot of the time, and I've yet to see a setup where we couldn't cut the cost far more than that. | ||||||||||||||
▲ | SatvikBeri 5 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||
I'd definitely be curious to hear how you'd approach our overall situation. We don't have significant egress costs, nor has any place I've worked with before. Our AWS costs are about 80% EC2 and Fargate, with the rest scattered over various services. Roughly half our spend is on 24/7 reserved instances, while the other half is in bursty analytics workloads. Our workloads are primarily memory-bound, and AWS offers pretty good options there, e.g. x2gd instances have 16gb RAM/cpu, while most rental options we found were much more CPU focused (and charged for it.) | ||||||||||||||
|