.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
Cloud Mercato tested CPU performance using a range of encryption speed tests:
Cloud Mercato's tested the I/O performance of this instance using a 100GB General Purpose SSD. Below are the results:
I/O rate testing is conducted with local and block storages attached to the instance. Cloud Mercato uses the well-known open-source tool FIO. To express IOPS the following parametersare used: 4K block, random access, no filesystem (except for write access with root volume and avoidance of cache and buffer.
.png)
For longer sessions, more data traffic, or higher numbers of concurrent users, I'd consider the M3.
A t2.medium is roughly 4x as powerful in all regards as a micro, and a m3.medium has similar RAM and bandwidth but less peak CPU. The instance storage will be a few times faster than a large EBS GP2 (SSD) volume on the m3.medium, of course.
Also, you can further reduce costs with a higher number of low configuration machines, like m3.medium instead of higher configuration core/task nodes.
You can use a master node (m3.large or m4.large or even m3.medium) and at-least 2 core/task nodes (m4.xlarge or m3.xlarge or c4.2xlarge).
The m5 instance type is similar, but for more consistent workloads. It has a nice balance of CPU, memory, and disk.
The m5 instance type is similar, but for more consistent workloads. It has a nice balance of CPU, memory, and disk. It’s not hard to see why almost half of EC2 workloads [are on “m” instances].
The m5 instance type is similar, but for more consistent workloads. It has a nice balance of CPU, memory, and disk. It’s not hard to see why almost half of EC2 workloads [are on “m” instances].
.svg)
.svg)
%201.svg)
%202.svg)