[diath]

No benchmarks. No FLOPs. No comparison to commodity hardware. I hate the cloud servers. "9 is faster than 8 which is faster than 7 which is faster than 6, ..., which is faster than 1, which has unknown performance".

[itomato]

You need to benchmark a new EC2 instance anyway. If it’s out of spec, burn it down and redeploy.

[Kwpolska]

Why is that needed, and how would you know if it’s out of spec?

[emidln]

How: You've ran the test on a bunch of hosts and create a spec from ranges.

Why: you might be concerned with network connectivity (you don't get to choose which data center you launch in and it might not be exactly equal), noisy neighbors on shared hosts, etc. if you're measuring for networking, you probably are spinning ups separate accounts/using a bank of accounts and something in every az until you find what you're looking for.

[itomato]

Why: you’re paying for a service level that has no guarantee from the vendor

[oofbey]

As soon as they're publicly usable people benchmark them carefully. All currently available models have clear metrics.

[sebazzz]

Since it will be a virtual machine, its performance can be arbitrarily reduced.

[mmontagna9]

If you're interested in using them you should just bench them yourself.

[1x_engineer]

I’ve had terrible luck benchmarking EC2. Measurements are too noisy to be repeatable. The same instance of the wrong type can swing by double digit percentages when tested twice an hour apart.

[renewiltord]

Who exactly believes manufacturer benchmarks? Just go run your benchmarks yourself and pick. Price/performance is a workload thing.