alt Hacker NewsGroan. Yes, absolutely true.
While I know this thread will turn into some noisy whack-a-mole bit of nonsense, an easy comparison is the c8g.2xlarge vs the c8i.2xlarge. The former is Graviton 4 vs Granite Rapids in the latter. Otherwise both 16GB, 15Gbps networking, and both are compute optimized, 8 vCPU machines.
Performance is very similar. Indeed, since you herald the ffmpeg result elsewhere the Graviton machine beats the Intel device by 16%.
And the Graviton is 17% cheaper.
Like, this is a ridiculous canard to even go down. Over half of AWS' new machines are Graviton based, but per your rhetoric they're actually uncompetitive. So I guess no one is using them? Wow, silly Amazon.
Replies
Groan. Absolutely not. :)
c8g passmark score: 1853 c8i passmark score: 3008
I guess the fps column isn't a good representation of single thread score. Also looking at the passmark scores for i4i vs i4g, i4g is about 1k and intel is about 2k, and the more modern Graviton equivalent of i4 is the same price, so...
https://go.runs-on.com/instances/ec2/c8g
https://go.runs-on.com/instances/ec2/c8i
https://go.runs-on.com/instances/ec2/i4g
https://go.runs-on.com/instances/ec2/i4i
Silly amazon.
The latter is a 4-core machine with 8 HyperThreads. This doesn't actually matter to your price-performance metric but is worth mentioning because it's the reason why the Intel part performs so comparatively poorly. They're fast chips, they're just wildly uneconomical. If you wanted to compare equal core counts (c8i.4xlarge vs. c8g.2xlarge), then the Intel instance type wins on performance but the Graviton is 58% cheaper.