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

AWS and Azure Are at Least 4x–10x More Expensive Than Hetzner

learn.umh.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 142 posts

Re: AWS and Azure Are at Least 4x–10x More Expensive Than Hetzner

#41

Post by CharlieDigital »

E_Bfx wrote: post #33
CharlieDigital wrote: post #17

On GCP and Azure, most folks would be better off running serverless containers via Cloud Run or Container Apps (AWS has no direct equivalent that scales to 0 and incurs no cost). Both of these scale to zero and offer 180k vCPU/s free per month, 360k GB/s free per month. You incur billing only against the active execution time. Cloud Run Jobs has a whole separate free monthly grant as well. You can run A LOT for free…

Thanks a lot, Most people think it is easier to use EC2 than FarGate since the first is the most famous one. But actually, it is the other way around!

If it absolutely has to be on AWS, I always go with ECS via (the poorly named) Copilot CLI. Makes it waaaaay easier.

https://aws.github.io/copilot-cli/

Re: AWS and Azure Are at Least 4x–10x More Expensive Than Hetzner

#43

Post by nijave »

Do people want to use VMs? Imo they're much more annoying to manage than higher-level managed services. The last few places I've worked we spent our time trying to get rid of VMs and replace them with equivalent managed services.

Even with automation tools like Ansible or immutable server images, packing as Docker images and running on a container orchestrator have always been much easier.

Re: AWS and Azure Are at Least 4x–10x More Expensive Than Hetzner

#44

Post by EdwardDiego »

CPLX wrote: post #38
EdwardDiego wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but you can also go to a Slack channel and get help from the people who wrote the FOSS code you're using. For free. Yep, if your Kafka is mission critical and crashes hard, that is bad. But things like Kafka are _never_ a black box you just spin up and never worry about, if anyone thinks so, CAP theorem will give them an awful surprise one day. You're always going to need someone in your team who understands th…

> For free Not sure we agree on the meaning of this phrase in this context.

If you ever hit an issue with Kafka or Strimzi, go to their Slack, some of the most intelligent people I've ever had the privilege to work alongside will be there, helping you.

For 0 money. That kinda free.

Re: AWS and Azure Are at Least 4x–10x More Expensive Than Hetzner

#46

Post by torginus »

jasode wrote: post #19

>While AWS and Azure are industry leaders, their advantages often only materialize at massive scales. [...] Your comparisons are similar to many others out there that focus on measuring basic cpu and memory. This type of easy comparison where AWS/Azure/GCP is treated as a "dumb" datacenter is easy for alternatives like Hetzner or self-hosting to "win". >Do you really need the advanced features of AWS and Azure right…

Honestly most of the stuff I do is internal facing tooling with usually less than 100 concurrent and 1k peak users. For those, managing a server or two, or god forbid, a small autoscaling cluster is not a hassle.

For high-scale operations, you need to think real hard about how you do things and usually simplicity is key, and trying to do a little as possible on the high throughput parts is useful.

The costs do add up when you have professionals maintaining your Cassadra/Kafka boxes, but the same degree of complexity exists on AWS, when you try to weave together a tapestry of EC2s, lambdas, various storage services, with all the delicious complexity of multiple VPCs and networking fineries while not blowing the budget.

It's a different skillset, but not less work.

Re: AWS and Azure Are at Least 4x–10x More Expensive Than Hetzner

#47

Post by asah »

jasode wrote: post #19

>While AWS and Azure are industry leaders, their advantages often only materialize at massive scales. [...] Your comparisons are similar to many others out there that focus on measuring basic cpu and memory. This type of easy comparison where AWS/Azure/GCP is treated as a "dumb" datacenter is easy for alternatives like Hetzner or self-hosting to "win". >Do you really need the advanced features of AWS and Azure right…

depends on scale - at small scale, fully managed services are a godsend but at scale (esp per-service) then it pays to self-manage or use low cost or FOSS mgmt tools.

Re: AWS and Azure Are at Least 4x–10x More Expensive Than Hetzner

#48

Post by gxd »

jasode wrote: post #19

>While AWS and Azure are industry leaders, their advantages often only materialize at massive scales. [...] Your comparisons are similar to many others out there that focus on measuring basic cpu and memory. This type of easy comparison where AWS/Azure/GCP is treated as a "dumb" datacenter is easy for alternatives like Hetzner or self-hosting to "win". >Do you really need the advanced features of AWS and Azure right…

Oftentimes, when you see someone proposing "just save 70% by installing open source XYZ", they are thinking like an individual and not a business. Fast-moving startups and medium businesses in areas with high cost of labor can save a ton by outsourcing labor to AWS/Azure if they are okay with the lock-in. Of course, each case is different and people shouldn't just blindly adopt AWS/Azure without thinking about it...

Re: AWS and Azure Are at Least 4x–10x More Expensive Than Hetzner

#49

Post by adamcharnock »

jasode wrote: post #19

>While AWS and Azure are industry leaders, their advantages often only materialize at massive scales. [...] Your comparisons are similar to many others out there that focus on measuring basic cpu and memory. This type of easy comparison where AWS/Azure/GCP is treated as a "dumb" datacenter is easy for alternatives like Hetzner or self-hosting to "win". >Do you really need the advanced features of AWS and Azure right…

This is what we're trying to address at Lithus[1]. We're offering both the raw compute resources, and also the DevOps time needed to setup and manage the services your engineering team needs.

[1] https://lithus.eu

Re: AWS and Azure Are at Least 4x–10x More Expensive Than Hetzner

#50

Post by mxuribe »

jiggawatts wrote: post #14

Most cloud customers don't pay on-demand retail prices. For example, Azure VM Reservations or Savings Plans typically provide a 50-65% discount. AWS has similar plans. For example, instead of the ancient F8 series used in the article, a modern D8as_v5 Azure instance under a 3-year Savings Plan is $115/mo. Also, the article compares CPX41 to EC2 and Azure VMs with dedicated cores, not shared cores. The CCX33 Hetzner m…

I certainly can't dispute the other points...but to me the AWS Savings plan always felt like vendor lock-in...and sort of like a virtual "on prem", in that i have to commit to something for X amount of time (like old school provisioning hardware and have it live for X time), and then i lose the flexibility of what i thought *the cloud* in general was supposed provide: that is, freedom to scale up, down or *out*, etc. I won't fault AWS and others for making their money; this is capitalism after all regardless of the vendor. I guess maybe the cloud sort of lost its shine, and it doesn't feel as liberating as maybe it once did, and both cost and complexity are overblown, maybe?
Post reply on HN