Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2) is a web service that provides secure, resizable compute capacity in the cloud. Users can launch instances with a variety of OSs, load them with custom application environments, manage network access permissions, and run images on multiple systems.
$0.01
per IP address with a running instance per hour on a pro rata basis
Amazon Web Services
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Amazon Web Services (AWS) is a subsidiary of Amazon that provides on-demand cloud computing services. With over 165 services offered, AWS services can provide users with a comprehensive suite of infrastructure and computing building blocks and tools.
$0
per month
Pricing
Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2)
Amazon Web Services
Editions & Modules
Data Transfer
$0.00 - $0.09
per GB
On-Demand
$0.0042 - $6.528
per Hour
EBS-Optimized Instances
$0.005
per IP address with a running instance per hour on a pro rata basis
Carrier IP Addresses
$0.005 - $0.10
T4g Instances
$0.04
per vCPU-Hour Linux, RHEL, & SLES
T2, T3 Instances
$0.05 ($0.096)
per vCPU-Hour Linux, RHEL, & SLES (Windows)
Free Tier
$0
per month
Basic Environment
$100 - $200
per month
Intermediate Environment
$250 - $600
per month
Advanced Environment
$600-$2500
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2)
Amazon Web Services
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
AWS allows a “save when you commit” option that offers lower prices when you sign up for a 1- or 3- year term that includes an AWS service or category of services.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2)
Amazon Web Services
Considered Both Products
Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2)
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2)
Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) integrates seamlessly with other AWS services, including S3 and Cloudfront, to accelerate content delivery and SNS to manage notifications.
Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) gives better performance for the instance of similar price range, more options for the instance type with good mix of vcpu and memory, administrator finds it easier to manage.
Azure VM Builder offers good service, but the options are quite limited (Too much inclined to Windows as it is prepared by Microsoft). EC2 image building capabilities are the best in the market, and offer Windows, Linux (CentOS, rh2, debian, ubuntu), along with other distros, …
Using Digital Ocean's droplets was much easier and faster to set up and test, but we needed very specific and custom configurations and hardware for our use case, so we went ahead with using Amazon's EC2 instances.
EC2 is easier and more intuitive to use than the same product from other Cloud providers, AWS has been improving on EC2 since its conception in 2006 while the other cloud providers are only following the steps of AWS without much innovation.
We chose Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) for our Splunk workloads so that we can take advantage of directly attached high speed storage, along with the other benefits of running on Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) instances, such as load balancing, spot pricing and general …
I found Microsoft Azure to be very very complex for new users. The dashboard is very intimidating.
Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud has more popularity and a bigger community to reach out to in case of any issues or help. Found Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud to be the most recommended …
Amazon EC2 is super flexible compared to the PaaS offerings like Heroku Platform and Google App Engine since with Amazon EC2, we have access to the terminal. In terms of pricing, it's basically just the same as Google Compute Engine. The deciding factor is Amazon EC2's native …
I did not select AWS EC2 as my final choice of infrastructure. I picked Linode. Linode, Digital Ocean, AWS EC2 all provide the VPS infrastructure we need. But because I'm a small company, the cost is very important. I also didn't need the other AWS features. I also want to make …
We tried a few other competitors on the web hosting side of our company and ultimately decided to go with AWS EC2 instances. AWS had the most flexibility, the most choices for different types of instances, a variety of Operating Systems, an incredible infrastructure across …
AWS EC2 is fully interfaced with the Amazon Web Services platform and Google compute engine fits in more with Google. While either provider would have been fine, we are pretty much all built on top of AWS at this point barring some clients. It just flowed easier.
Amazon was the first one in the market to provide virtual machines in the cloud and certainly gained a lot of popularity before the rest even came to the picture. The different service providers are quite mutually exclusive, and one cannot easily use more than one at the same …
EC2 has better modes, a variety of instances and UI support as compare to GCE. GCE is completely command driven. As compared to it EC2 provides a better user interface.
We have been using EC2 for so much longer, that even though we use Azure's other features and services more then the equivalent AWS features and services, we don't usually go for Azure's VM offerings first over EC2. I guess that that means this recommendation is mostly based …
Amazon EC2 is the best cloud solution on the market. It has very competitive prices and an incredible number of services available for use. The billing is very efficient and details. EC2 is a great option for individuals, small groups, and large companies. As the needs of …
Amazon's been leading the way in the past few years in cloud computing and have easily become a name we can trust. When we looked at options, nothing compared to EC2 when you looked at the scalability and flexibility of the product. For the needs we were trying to meet, these …
EC2 is a much more advantageous compared with the competitors because it has a much better console, configuration, auto-scalability, uptime, and many other features that are way better than other services I have seen so far. It also provides great backup services integrated …
In our eyes, Amazon has become the de-facto cloud provider. We have searched for other options, but none of them compare when you take documentation, training, support, ease of use all into account. Of all the cloud environments that our admins use daily, AWS is by far the …
All the services above can be built on a server vs using a service. It allows teams that have more breadth of development to dive deep into the implementation and tailor the performance based on the needs they have specifically. In addition, we can tear down failed experiments …
In my personal experience, AWS is superior to both GCP and Azure in the majority of usable applications. GCP suffers from the near total misunderstanding of how support system is even supposed to work, and while _some_ services are pretty nifty and well-polished, some are …
AWS stands out in its ability to adapt technology more quickly. All the new features, first adapted by AWS, make it the market leader. The key metrics, such as MTTR, are among the best among all other cloud service providers. The AWS dashboard and analytics features are very …
Amazon Web Services Lambda supports more triggers, richer language/runtime support, and has tighter integrations with Amazon Web Services, as compared to Azure/Google Cloud functions.Amazon Web Services also has better global infrastructure, with 33 regions and 105 availability …
We tried various other cloud providers and features provided by them. Many of the cloud providers have similar features but there are few factors which make Amazon Web Services cloud as preferable choice of our bank are cost, location of Amazon Web Services datacenter where it …
Apart from Amazon Web Services, we use Microsoft Azure in some of our projects. I have some basic experience in Google Cloud Platform (GCP) as well. If given a choice, I would prefer using Amazon Web Services over Azure or GCP. I find provisioning of resources relatively faster …
Amazon Web Services is better among all of them due to its performance, stability, security and navigation. It effectively saves the cost and provides better facilities than the other competitors. It plays great role when it comes to user friendly interface. It also provided …
AWS has the largest market share and most established and over 200 services for diverse needs. AWS has a very power user interface and pay as you go work well that others. AWS has the by far largest network of data centers for low latency and high availability. The regular …
Better global availability and use across industries. AWS has a great ecosystem of experts, developers, solution architects and it helps to get to know them at various AWS events across the world
Amazon Web Services is much more mature than all of the cloud service providers out in the market. It has 300+ services that solve almost all of your cloud problems.
Compared to other providers like Google Cloud Platform(GCP) and Microsoft Azure, [Amazon Web Services] has a wider range of services, which help you easier implement the solution you want. Also, they have been in the market for more years than their competitors. Moreover, they …
Amazon SageMaker is being extensively used by our R&D department for machine learning models development and research purposes. We work in Jupyter notebooks hosted on SageMaker notebook instances rather than notebooks hosted in local machines by doing so most ML algorithms …
I feel AWS usage of services by global clients has been the most compared to Azure or Openshift. AWS service offering's and usage are economical and much more secured. Its has build an ecosystem of providing all the services capabilities under one umbrella . It provides …
The decision was made to go with AWS because of name recognition and familiarity by contractors we hired. I checked out Google Compute Engine a few years ago, and it did have similar option set, however Google in general was behind Amazon's offerings.
Amazon Web Services fits best for all levels of organisations like startup, mid level or enterprise. The services are easy to use and doesn't require a high level of understanding as you can learn via blogs or youtube videos. AWS is Reasonable in cost as the plan is pay as you …
Amazon Web Services is well suited when we have a huge amount of data to store, process, manipulate and get meaningful information out of. It is also suitable when we need very fast data retrieval from the database. They provide a superior product at a fair price which allows …
Both the services are in the field for quite sometime. And the biggest competitor of Amazon Web Services is Microsoft Azure. Though, Azure easily connects with Microsoft services like a jelly, even in AWS its so easy. And the best thing is due to its vast variety community …
Amazon Web Services has a much more seasoned and known set of tools. The learning resources and documentation is much more prevalent and applicable to more scenarios which definitely helps with implementation. Google cloud does offer comparable products, and the user interface …
We evaluated Google Cloud and Azure at the beginning of our cloud journey but at that time, AWS was so far ahead of the other public cloud providers that there was no question about whether or not to go with AWS. They have the broadest catalog of services and their support is …
We have investigated Azure as well, for this specific need it made the most sense to go with [Amazon Web Services], the design was much simpler to get going. We have also used Azure for some of the other deployments that we have done with SaaS systems. These are the two …
Our tech team was comfortable with Amazon Web Services and that is why we started with Amazon Web Services. In the meantime, we searched for other services like Amazon Web Services but it seems that facilities like Elastic Bean and the first year free made us stick to Amazon …
Suitable for companies that are looking for performance at a competitive price, flexibility to switch instance type even with RI, flexibility to add-on IOPS, option to lower running cost with the regular introduction of new instance type that comes with higher performance but at a lower cost.
We are using RDS for the database services. With RDS, we don't have to manage much, as most of the DBA tasks are automated. For development purposes, we are using Kubernetes pods, which makes it easy to deploy applications and scale up as needed. AWS integration with in-house applications is seamless, making it easy to keep a data-sensitive application on-premises while still utilizing AWS services.
A great variety of choices in Amazon Machine Image (AMI) types. Users can select a more basic type to run generic workloads, but also have the choice to pick an AMI pre-installed with specific services in the AWS Marketplace.
The range of instance types can support the usage from a student's exploration (inexpensive general-purpose nano instances) to an enterprise's most intense workloads (memory or storage-optimized instances with terabytes of memory and ultra-fast network connection).
The pricing options, from regular instances, reserved instances to spot instances allow users to get the job done and make smart choices about how much they want to pay and when they want to pay.
This service is a bit difficult to consume. New users need a big learning curve to use this service effectively.
UI for EC2 service is a little complex and at many places, it misses detailed explanation.
Sometimes it takes too long to create images of EC2 instances. This keeps your EC2 up for that extra time. When instances are heavy, it penalizes a lot of money.
I would gladly rely on AWS for any large-scale application deployment. For prototyping and small-scale applications, a more heavily managed environment on top of the 'bare metal' virtual infrastructure, such as Heroku or Elastic Bean Stalk, is probably a more productive approach in most cases
It's easy and straightforward for a technical person to use it via SSH, but when working in cross-functional teams, using Amazon's web console is difficult for this particular service. Most modern cloud providers provide a more seamless user interface to interact with their cloud machines, and the same should have been the case with EC2.
Amazon Web Services is a great tool when it comes to middle size organizations like us. It provides multiple tools and functionalities in low costs. The best feature we have to pay as we go. No financial burden on company for the unused instances. It also comes with greater level of security such as two level authorization such as multi factor authorization.
AWS does not provide the raw performance that you can get by building your own custom infrastructure. However, it is often the case that the benefits of specialized, high-performance hardware do not necessarily outweigh the significant extra cost and risk. Performance as perceived by the user is very different from raw throughput.
AWS's support is good overall. Not outstanding, but better than average. We have had very little reason to engage with AWS support but in our limited experience, the staff has been knowledgeable, timely and helpful. The only negative is actually initiating a service request can be a bit of a pain.
The customer support of Amazon Web Services are quick in their responses. I appreciate its entire team, which works amazingly, and provides professional support. AWS is a great tool, indeed, to provide customers a suitable way to immediately search for their compatible software's and also to guide them in a good direction. Moreover, this product is a good suggestion for every type of company because of its affordability and ease of use.
Azure VM Builder offers good service, but the options are quite limited (Too much inclined to Windows as it is prepared by Microsoft). EC2 image building capabilities are the best in the market, and offer Windows, Linux (CentOS, rh2, debian, ubuntu), along with other distros, which helps customers choose according to their needs.
In my personal experience, AWS is superior to both GCP and Azure in the majority of usable applications. GCP suffers from the near total misunderstanding of how support system is even supposed to work, and while _some_ services are pretty nifty and well-polished, some are mindbogglingly designed black boxes with self-conflicting documentation. Some of it comes from having legacy systems, sure, but AWS somehow manages, even having a rather big lead start. Azure, from my limited experience, is limited to people somehow coerced into its usage by external constraints. That being said, IF you can design and implement something there, it will probably run fine.
With EC2 you pay only when is Running, so you can save up to 75% on Dev environments which are running only on office hours
You have several ways to pay for EC2, with EC2 Reserved Instances you pay with a discount of up to 72% if you make a commitment of using them from 1 or 3 years
With EC2 spot you can use spare AWS EC2 capacity with a discount of up to 90%, your workload must be interrupt tolerant as your EC2 could be reclaim by AWS and the EC2 terminated
Provisioning resources like large database instances is really quick. We can easily scale our instances up or down as per need.
Storing files in S3 instead of onprem NAS drives is much more economical, especially for the files stored in glacier deep archive for compliance purposes.
Backup snapshots of EBS volumes and RDS instances may increase the cost of cloud if not cleaned up properly.