hetzner: Intel Xeon E3-1275 (4 physical cores)
ec2: 4 virtual cores (13 "ecus" where each ecu is ~ 2007 xeon core)
hetzner: 32 GB ECC
ec2: 34 GB (previous commenters have speculated that it's non-ecc because Amazon only mentions otherwise for compute units)
hetnzer: customizable, cheapest is 3TB disk or 120 GB SSD for 15 euros/month
ec2: 850 GB (ephermeral)
hetzner: 100 Mbit (incoming free, 10TB outgoing free, 7 euros/TB after)
ec2: unknown speed (incoming free, $0.12/GB outgoing, $120/TB)
hetzner: ~$265 for first month, $115 thereafter (includes setup fee, excludes VAT, after euro to usd conversion,
includes cheapest hd option)
edit: formatting, spelling
We moved from a dedicated service to EC2 in 2010. At the time got some 30/40% drop in the hosting cost for the same traffic. As apart from marginally less hosting price, it also allowed us to start some instances in the day time and shut them in the night. So hourly billing is a plus.
Which also allows me to not shy away from experimenting before use. For example, on moving time we were on 32 bit and were running only small instances.
Now we have built 64 bit images which allows running of anything we like from small to extra-large. So for example at present we have 2 mediums and 1 small running in the day time. And just 1 medium and 1 small running in the night time.
And for some time in between tried it out with just 1 large and 1 small. I always need a small one. As there are lots of scripts which keep doing health checks etc. on each other, and can restart the other, on some conditions. So 2 instances are needed for reasons.
So you have to factor in these kind of reasons too. The dynamism it offers is a big reason (and need for some) to stay there when the other alternative is dedicated.
Sincere question: As I would like to be aware of some other good options. Does some other companies like RackSpace offer as much control as EC2 does?
edit: typos and minor rephrase
As for the experimenting part, you could build yourself your own VM cluster. There are a lot of prepackaged solutions such as oVirt which come with the full administration suite and some even come with the preconfigured OS. It really isn't very complicated and you get predictable performance on modern hardware.
Here are the EC2 rates for reserved instance (total including hourly fee plus reservation fee):
$375/month for reserving 1 year
$282/month for reserving 3 years
It's not too bad compared to Hetzner. On-demand instance is for spinning it up on very short notice and shutting it down after the work is done.
Don't agree with this, unless there is hourly billing. As if you just want to try out some thing, say a large instance instead of medium, to just see how it changes something, won't be possible here.
edit: would love to know why the down vote?
In fact we ourselves, have not been able to go for a reserved instance yet. Although have been thinking about it for an year or so. As there is always a likeliness of going to a bigger configuration in the near future (small->medium or medium->large etc.). So you are not sure if reserving is a good idea.
So you settle for the gains of the on-demand e.g. having more instances in the day
Not a big deal if you are from the US but if you are from Australia for example then you wouldn't be able to take advantage of a Sydney availability zone if it become available (as it is rumored).
Both the c1.large and m1.xlarge are slower than a decent 9-10 year old server costing less than $100/mo. The same server can be purchased for less than $200 on eBay!
See my benchmarks:
Apparently AES-NI is also available in version Xen 4.0+ for VPS users as well. Something to ask your VPS provider.
But that's not the point of AWS. The point is that you get a PLATFORM as a service. Not just a box. You get an enterprise class queuing, workflow, load balancing, DNS etc all in the one place. Not to mention it's unrivalled auto scaling features.
Dedicated servers come with dedicated disks or SSDs, memory, CPUs, network cards.
Decent dedicated hosting providers deliver new servers in a few hours. And they too provide load balancing, dns, filers, backups, elastic ips, etc.
The only difference between AWS or a decent dedicated servers provider is the time it takes to put a new servers online. Minutes with AWS, hours with dedicated servers.
Considering that AWS prices can easily be twice the price of dedicated servers, renting a few spare dedicated servers is still cheaper than AWS, and delays are even shorter.
The best combination is a dedicated server for the app server that is close to Amazon.
For a great example see http://www.zadarastorage.com/.
Actually one of the best ways to go is to find dedicated hosting providers in the same data center. For example Server Beach is faster at accessing Amazon SQS than Amazon EC2 is.
Although the URLs and the formats aren't an official AWS API, I think it is pretty safe to count on them for an application like this.
edit: or copy this: http://mikekhristo.com/ec2-ondemand-vs-reserved-instance-sav...
I don't think as of now, I can reserve a smaller configuration and if my need changes can just switch to a bigger reserved configuration. And the billing accommodates for the reserved price which I already paid for the smaller one.
(As a real example, I have medium running all the time, but don't reserve it thinking I may have to move to a large one in the near future. )
Or can I already do this, and it is my bad that I have not noticed? If yes, then please point me to the information about that.
If not, then can you take it as a feature request from me please.
And I am not completely off topic, as its partly an interface issue. I am not 100% sure, if such a thing is not possible. Also BTW, if you have asked a question in EC2 forums, then you will know that the answer often is late enough such that, by the time its there you would have already solved your problem.
I was starting some instances this morning, and it's shocking how poorly Amazon describes what they offer. I had three browser windows and a calculator open just to figure out which instances are being offered, and at which relative prices. You'd think they would spend more time on this stuff.
It would also be great if you could show estimated monthly/weekly pricing for each instance type, with comparisons for reserved and on demand versions.
Even after I am signed into AWS, there are "Sign Up Now" buttons everywhere. So, it's confusing whether or not I am signed in.
I expect the big icon in the upper left to bring me to a useful "home page" like the AWS management console. Instead it brings me to a page that is just a big advertisement (for services I already use.)
I just want to get to my EC2 management console quickly, so I sometimes click on the link that says "Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2)."
That brings me to an advertisement page for EC2... again, this is after I'm already signed in and just trying to use the service. That EC2 specific advertising page still doesn't have a direct link to the EC2 management console.
To do anything useful, I need to click on AWS Management Console which only becomes visible after I mouse over "My Account/Console." But the "My Account" link, the only thing on the whole page that I ever want, is in a smaller font than almost everything else on the page.
Eventually, I wrote my own little AWS interface with python & boto just to avoid having to kludge through the web page.
EDIT: I apologize if this is off the topic of how to present pricing. I got excited when I saw an AWS engineer asking "what can we do better"
Where I get lost is trying to find the reference documentation as opposed to the newbie guides or the architecture overviews. Scenarios similar to: "crap it's been a year and a half since I've bundled a new AMI and I forgot the exact steps" where I need to look up some detail of the API. That's where I wind up going to google to search the amazon site for the docs I need.
My issues with the current layout are:
- all the text blocks in between charts that are not really informative after you've read them once.
- The fact that the instance types, data transfer, EBS, etc... are all listed at the same logical level when I make a clear distinction between, on the one hand, all the different instance types and, on the other hand, everything that pertains to an instance (logically underneath an instance).
Not exactly the same, but you can log in to your instance directly from the console
1 ECU is equivalent to 1.0 GHz - 1.2 GHz Xeon CPU in 2007. And the number of cores is usually small.
2 disk: m2.4xlarge : 1680 GiB instance storage (2 x 840 GiB)
4 disk: c1.xlarge : 1680 GiB instance storage (4 x 420 GiB)
and a quick start: "RAID0 ephemeral storage on AWS EC2"
only for short bursts, extreme throttling afterward
I would never dream of trying to build anything meant to stick around and make me money on one though of course.
On EC2 you have no way of putting yourself in the DMZ, and the "Security Groups" only allow you to open up UDP or TCP forwarding. You cannot configure any other type of protocol/traffic and cannot bypass it entirely.