.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)
Amazon EC2 T4g instances are powered by Arm-based custom built AWS Graviton2 processors and deliver up to 40% better price performance over T3 instances for a broad set of burstable general purpose workloads.
Do you know how it compares to t3a?Edit: nvm: $0.0336/h for t4g.medium vs $0.0376/h t3a.medium in aws-east north virginia for on demand. Sucks not available in aws-southeast-1 yet, I would switch just for the performance bump over t*a instance.
The instance type was changed in the order of t4g.medium → m6g.medium → t4g.medium. After changing the instance type, the first number of CPU credits recorded was approximately 12. As a result, no CPU credits were lost.
I started one EC2 of m6g.medium. I changed the instance type of that EC2 to t4g.medium. I think that when you change the instance type, the count starts from 0.
Specifications and performance for Amazon EC2 - t4g.medium
I ran the popular Geekbench 5 benchmark against t3.medium, t3a.medium and t4g.medium
We ran the tests for T3.medium vs T3.small vs T4g.medium vs T4g.small AWS RDS PostgreSQL instances and found out that all of them were very similar when it came to the speed of write/read operations when you're performing an operation that is supposed to take a short time ~ 1-5 seconds.
.svg)
.svg)
%201.svg)
%202.svg)