Re:Comparing Bandwidth Costs of Amazon, Google and Microsoft...
by Johnny555 on Monday June 05, 2017 @08:19PM
(#14493630)
With an m4.16xl, there's no effective difference between a dedicated or default tenancy instance - only one .16xl can run on a physical hypervisor, which is reflected in the pricing, it's $3.20/hour whether it's dedicated or not:
https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/on-demand/ https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/purchasing-options/dedicated-inst...
For smaller instances, there is around a 10% increase for dedicated, for example, for an m4.4xl, the price goes to $0.88 for dedicated tenancy versus $0.80 for default.
There is a $2/hour fee for each region in which you have dedicated instances, but that gets lost in the noise if you're using significant AWS resources. (it's $2/hour regardless of how many instances you're running)
We haven't noticed any significant difference between performance on dedicated and non-dedicated instances, and only use dedicated instances where required for compliance/regulatory reasons.
Re:Comparing Bandwidth Costs of Amazon, Google and Microsoft...
by late2part on Tuesday June 06, 2017 @01:34AM
(#14494993)
An m4.16xl has 8 physical cores; what hypervisor does AWS buy that only has 8 physical cores?
My smallest physical servers have 8 physical cores.
Re:Comparing Bandwidth Costs of Amazon, Google and Microsoft...
by meatmanek on Tuesday June 06, 2017 @03:52AM
(#14495508)
An m4.16xl has 32 cores / 64 threads.
Re:Comparing Bandwidth Costs of Amazon, Google and Microsoft...
by late2part on Tuesday June 06, 2017 @02:43PM
(#14499911)
okay, my error - thanks!
Re:Comparing Bandwidth Costs of Amazon, Google and Microsoft...
by openasocket on Monday June 05, 2017 @08:18PM
(#14493624)
Why get a dedicated instance and not get reserve pricing? You can get those instances for a fraction of what you're currently paying
edit: I had selected a dedicated instance in order to compare apples to apples. By definition you don't share a colo server.