[y4mi]

Esp if you consider bare metal servers. I'm currently paying 45€ for a Ryzen server with 64gb ECC ram and 1tb nvme storage (raid1).

The speed is incredible if compared to ec2 or root server performance from other vendors. Even if they've dedicated resources.

[_3u10]

The cache misses alone mean the cloud should be cheaper than bare metal. In general you can buy outright any cloud service for about 3 months of the price of the cloud.

Why anyone would run their pointer chasing code in a heavy cache eviction environment is beyond me. The code is slow to start with, and then you make sure that none of your data is in the cache. Why you'd pay 10x for slower hardware makes no sense.

What people should be doing is running on bare metal and turning off all the garbage meltdown protections that kill performance. If you're not a cloud provider and you're allowing people to execute arbitrary code on your hardware, you've got much bigger problems than meltdown.

[maccard]

> In general you can buy outright any cloud service for about 3 months of the price of the cloud.

If you compare on demand lrice for cloud, sure. Reserved and spot instances change the balance significantly. If you're running a handful of servers, sure it's a no brainer. But when you start dealing with any sort of human cost (operations, it) the savings you get are dwarfed by the human costs because that's what you're paying for with aws and azure. And, when you're at mega scale you're negotiating separate deals anyway.

That's also not considering the value of the combined offerings. On aws for example, I can spin up a kubernetes cluster with rolling updates pushed by GitHub actions in less time than it took me to write this comment, and it will be usable and modifiable by anyone who has experience with aws or k8s. the cost savings of running my own infrastructure and managing all the moving pieces is dwarfed by the fact that the service provided is widely used and well known.

[KronisLV]

> I'm currently paying 45€ for a Ryzen server with 64gb ECC ram and 1tb nvme storage (raid1).

That does sound like a really good deal!

Until now i've only been using VPSes (apart from homelab servers as CI nodes etc.) because they're cheaper for the smaller sizes, but for comparison's sake, the cheapest VPS provider's (that i know of and trust) offering with 64 GB of RAM and 640 GB of storage would cost ~260 euros a month: https://www.time4vps.com/?affid=5294

Well, i guess there's also other VPS providers out there that can nearly match the price, like Contabo, though they do have mixed reviews: https://contabo.com/en/ (personally i just found their UI to be extremely dated and there are setup fees, but otherwise they were decent), though even then they'd cost anywhere from 30 - 90 euros a month.

[y4mi]

yeah, low resource VPSs are great value if you don't mind the performance too much.

I was using a Netcup root server with 2 dedicated cores/8gb ram before i switched to my current hetzner baremetal server. It only cost ~7€ per month, so much better value if i you don't mind that everything just takes a little longer.

i dont think i'll ever go back though. even using the shell on the baremetal server is so much more responsive vs the vps.

but for what its worth: you can get a VPS with similar resources (16 cores, 64gb ram, 2tb ssd) for 40€ with netcup.

[bennyp101]

And anything that is static and needs to be up can just be cached at the edge somewhere, which is peanuts really, and means that if your bare metal goes down, you can still keep something up

[kuon]

May I ask you were you rent it?

[bennyp101]

I pay about the same for a server from Hetzner - from the server auctions (https://www.hetzner.com/sb)

- AMD Ryzen 5 3600 6-Core Processor (Cores 12)

- 64GB

- 2 x 2TB HDDs

[kuon]

That's cheap.

We really underestimate the costs of running in the cloud.

[jokethrowaway]

It's mostly marketing of aws employees and professionals that built their career around aws price and complexity.

A great idea to be honest, the market willing to overpay for server will probably be able to pay more to you.

[bennyp101]

I guess a lot of the cloud costs are due to not having to really manage anything yourself - you are essentially paying for a team of people to keep the 'server' up and running and make sure that things 'Just Work' (largely, anyway)