m7i.xlarge

The price difference is compensated well by performance, so at the end of the day the price-performance score is the best.

Intel **m7i** is the second, though it is more than 50% improvement over the m6i series.

As you are aware, as of May 2024, there are no m7i series instance types with NVMe-based volumes.

I understand your explanation, but the reason why AWS took the decision is not clear, as the equivalent ARM instance type, m7g, has m7gd instance types, so is not only a matter of "consistency across different instance types"

m7i instances in AWS don't have built-in storage like previous types. Instead, they use EBS volumes for storage. AWS likely chose this because EBS is more flexible, reliable, and consistent across different instance types. It also allows for better cost management.

as of May 2024, there are no m7i series instance types with NVMe-based volumes.

I'm migrating from previous instance type m6id to m7i and I cannot migrate using the same storage configuration as m7i instance type has no Instance Storage

the reason why AWS took the decision is not clear, as the equivalent ARM instance type, m7g, has m7gd instance types, so is not only a matter of "consistency across different instance types"

m7i instances in AWS don't have built-in storage like previous types. Instead, they use EBS volumes for storage.

I'm migrating from previous instance type m6id to m7i and I cannot migrate using the same storage configuration as m7i instance type has no Instance Storage

The price difference is compensated well by performance, so at the end of the day the price-performance score is the best.

Intel **m7i** is the second, though it is more than 50% improvement over the m6i series.

Intel **m7i** is the second, though it is more than 50% improvement over the m6i series.

The **m7i** is a bit better than **m7g**.

When trying to create an autoscaling group with instance type `m7i.xlarge` and machineImage ` ec2.MachineImage.latestAmazonLinux2023()` I receive the following error: `Deployment failed: Error: The stack named Dev-PerfTests failed creation, it may need to be manually deleted from the AWS console: ROLLBACK_COMPLETE: Resource handler returned message: "The specified instance type m7i.xlarge is not valid (Service: AutoScaling, Status Code: 400, Request ID: 0d9c9cd9-d2fe-48c7-98f2-ee04a8f93602)" (RequestToken: 70bffecd-981f-7ad2-8ebd-f0d7d8730f02, HandlerErrorCode: InvalidRequest), Resource handler returned message: "The specified instance type m7i.large is not valid (Service: AutoScaling, Status Code: 400, Request ID: 8404beeb-4b40-4afc-878b-8dfd1d3a787f)" (RequestToken: 2c522a9e-440f-965a-aca9-3252ef99729e, HandlerErrorCode: InvalidRequest) `

The price difference is compensated well by performance, so at the end of the day the price-performance score is the best.

Intel **m7i** is the second, though it is more than 50% improvement over the m6i series.

I measured cpu performance on the M7i, M6in etc… and all of them run at about max 8% cpu usage but the fps stay at around 30. It seems like it’s throttling … Any ideas? I need to run Indian servers. And i don’t know what to do.

i still have cpu credits available. More than enough. The performance is different in both regions.

We tried setting up On-Demand M7i, M6i and M6in (which is per AWS good for game server deployment) instances. But are getting the exact same result.

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].