Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Purchase an EC2 Instance Savings Plan for the online gaming application instances. Use On-Demand Instances for the analytics application.
Purchase an EC2 Instance Savings Plan for the online gaming application instances. Use Spot Instances for the analytics application.
Use Spot Instances for the online gaming application and the analytics application. Set up a catalog in AWS Service Catalog to provision services at a discount.
Use On-Demand Instances for the online gaming application. Use Spot Instances for the analytics application. Set up a catalog in AWS Service Catalog to provision services at a discount.
Explanations:
While purchasing an EC2 Instance Savings Plan for the gaming application ensures cost savings, using On-Demand Instances for the analytics application is not cost-effective. On-Demand pricing is higher compared to Spot Instances, which can be used for interruptible workloads like analytics.
Purchasing an EC2 Instance Savings Plan for the always-on gaming application ensures availability and cost savings, while using Spot Instances for the analytics application leverages lower costs for non-essential workloads that can handle interruptions. This combination is the most cost-effective solution.
Using Spot Instances for the gaming application is not suitable since they cannot guarantee availability, which is a requirement. The gaming application must always be available, making this option unfeasible.
While using Spot Instances for the analytics application is a cost-effective choice, using On-Demand Instances for the gaming application does not optimize costs as effectively as a Savings Plan. A Savings Plan would provide better pricing for the continuously running gaming instances.
From what I’ve seen, the answer is:
Purchase an EC2 Instance Savings Plan for the online gaming application instances. Use Spot Instances for the analytics application.