Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 168 posts

Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]

#31

Post by parchley »

mgaunard wrote: post #26

Pricing in AWS is heavily dependent on whether you reserve the instance and for how long. In my experience, if you reserve a bare metal instance for 3 years (which is the biggest discount), it costs 2 times the price of buying it outright. I'm surprised to hear about the numbers from the video being way different, but then, it's a video, so I didn't watch it and can't tell if he did use the correct pricing.

You seem to insinuate that the correct pricing is using a 3 year commitment. That seems very much not logical to me considering the original promise of the cloud to be flexible, and to scale up and down on demand.

Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]

#32

Post by mgaunard »

oersted wrote: post #24
danpalmer wrote: post #3

S3 is also 10x more expensive than this single consumer grade second hand hard drive I have. Managed NAT gateways are also 10000x more expensive than my router. This is a boring argument that has been done to death.

As a CTO of a number of small startups, I am still struggling to understand what exactly AWS and other cloud providers give you to justify the markup. And yes we’ve been heavy users of both AWS and Google Cloud for years, mainly because of the credits they initially provided, but also used VMs, dedicated servers and other services from Hetzner and OVH extensively. In my experience, in terms of availability and securi…

What AWS gives you is the ability to spin up dozens if not thousands of hosts in a single click.

If you run your own hardware, getting stuff shipped to a datacenter and installed is 2 to 4 weeks (and potentially much longer based on how efficient your pipeline is)

Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]

#33

Post by 4ndrewl »

flibble wrote: post #10

I do like watching these comparisons however it reminds me of a conversation I had recently with my 10 year old. Son: Why does the croissant cost €2.80 here while it's only €0.45 in Lidl? Who would buy that? Me: You're not paying for the croissant, you're paying for the staff to give it to you, for the warm café, for the tables to be cleaned and for the seat to sit on.

I used to believe that, but in the enterprise we now we have teams on client-side cloud engineers to manage our AWS/Azure/GCP infra!

Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]

#34

Post by aurareturn »

oersted wrote: post #24
danpalmer wrote: post #3

S3 is also 10x more expensive than this single consumer grade second hand hard drive I have. Managed NAT gateways are also 10000x more expensive than my router. This is a boring argument that has been done to death.

As a CTO of a number of small startups, I am still struggling to understand what exactly AWS and other cloud providers give you to justify the markup. And yes we’ve been heavy users of both AWS and Google Cloud for years, mainly because of the credits they initially provided, but also used VMs, dedicated servers and other services from Hetzner and OVH extensively. In my experience, in terms of availability and securi…

When your cheap dedicated server goes down and your admin is on holiday and you have hundreds of angry customers calling you, you'll get it.

Or you need to restore your Postgres database and you find out that the backups didn't work.

And finally you have a brilliant idea of hiring a second $150k/year dev ops admin so that at least one is always working and they can check each other's work. Suddenly, you're spending $300k on two dev ops admins alone and the cost savings of using cheaper dedicated servers are completely gone.

Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]

#35

Post by refulgentis »

whstl wrote: post #11
hshdhdhj4444 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t understand your complaint. The point of having a private chef is so you don’t have to cook food by yourself. It’s still extremely useful to know if the private chef is cheaper or more expensive than cooking by yourself and by how much, so you can make a decision more aware of the trade offs involved.

The problem with this discussion is that a lot of people on these threads work as overpaid assistants to the one private chef, but also have never cooked at home. Translating: A lot of people work with AWS, are making bank, and are terrified of their skill set being made obsolete. They also have no idea what it means to use a dedicated server. That’s why we get the same tired arguments and assumptions (such as the be…

One of the least insightful comments I’ve seen in my 16 years here. “it’s because everyone here is dumb and knows it, and they are panicking and lying because they don’t want you to blow up their scam.”

Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]

#36

Post by paranoidrobot »

I'm struggling to find a way to express my opinion about this video without seeming like a complete ass.

If the author's point was to make a low effort "ha ha AWS sucks" video, well sure: success, I guess.

Nobody outside of AWS sales is going to say AWS is cheaper.

But comparing the lowest end instances, and apparently, using ECS without seeming to understand how they're configuring or using it just makes their points about it being slower kind of useless. Yes you got some instances that were 5-10x slower than Hetzner. On it's own that's not particularly useful.

I thought, going in, that this was going to be along the lines of others I have seen, previously: you can generally get a reasonably beefy machine with a bunch of memory and local SSDs that will come in half or less the cost of a similar spec EC2 instance. That would've been a reasonable path to go. Add on that you don't have issues with noisy neighbors when running a dedicated box, and yeah - something people can learn from.

But this... Yeah. Nah. Sorry

Maybe try again but get some help speccing out the comparison configuration from folks who do have experience in this.

Unfortunately it will cost more to do a proper comparison with mid-range hardware.

Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]

#39

Post by stacktrace »

flibble wrote: post #10

I do like watching these comparisons however it reminds me of a conversation I had recently with my 10 year old. Son: Why does the croissant cost €2.80 here while it's only €0.45 in Lidl? Who would buy that? Me: You're not paying for the croissant, you're paying for the staff to give it to you, for the warm café, for the tables to be cleaned and for the seat to sit on.

Exactly. AWS has its own quirks and frustrations, sure but at the end of the day, I’m not using AWS just for raw compute. I’m paying for the entire ecosystem around it: security and access management, S3, Lambda, networking, monitoring, reliability guarantees, and a hundred little things that quietly keep the lights on.

People can have different opinions on this, of course, but personally, if I have a choice, I'd rather not be juggling both product development and the infrastructure headaches that come with running everything myself. That trade-off isn’t worth it for me.

Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]

#40

Post by szszrk »

baxtr wrote: post #27
flibble wrote: post #10

I do like watching these comparisons however it reminds me of a conversation I had recently with my 10 year old. Son: Why does the croissant cost €2.80 here while it's only €0.45 in Lidl? Who would buy that? Me: You're not paying for the croissant, you're paying for the staff to give it to you, for the warm café, for the tables to be cleaned and for the seat to sit on.

Good example. I also like the "why does a bottle of water cost $5 after security at airports" example. You have no choice. You’re locked in and can’t get out. Maybe that’s the better analogy?

On point.

We don't pay million $ bills on AWS to "hang out" in a cozy place. I mean, you can, but that's insanity.

Post reply on HN