[joncfoo]

At $previous_job we shifted a large workload from Intel to Graviton which was projected to save ~$1.7m annually while keeping roughly equivalent performance (after some tuning).

[wahern]

> which was projected to save ~$1.7m annually

Did it?

[notyourwork]

I've seen first hand validation on massive workloads moving to Graviton based instances. This includes low latency high TPS java services and offline big data compute on EMR.

All combined the hype is quite real. Heck, even moving an intel based service to newer nitro based EC2 instances resulted in a drastic performance improvement. Moved from m5.24xlarge --> m6g.8xlarge with better service performance and improved latency characteristics. Intel is in trouble in my opinion.

[rozenmd]

OnlineOrNot (my company) saved about 30% moving DBs from Intel to ARM, so it sounds legit

[AdamJacobMuller]

1.7 million may be a lot or may be a tiny drop depending on your overall (like for like) spend. The % saved is the important metric here not the aggregate dollar amount.

Did you replace 5m of EC2 with 3.3m of EC2 and save 1.7m (impressive) or did you replace 50m of EC2 with 48.3m of EC2 (not really so impressive)?

[redundantly]

> or did you replace 50m of EC2 with 48.3m of EC2 (not really so impressive)?

I'm failing to comprehend how that's not impressive. Bean counters would still love this type of savings.

[eugenekolo]

I'd say exact value versus % can be more meaningful in many non-billion+ companies.

Understanding you saved $1M/yr means you're closer to profitability (I understand in the VC world all you really care about is % growth, but that's up for debate if that's how everything should be) or able to hire more engineers.