Should I abandon AWS?

Discussion in 'Hosting Advice' started by Ace_Monkey_Ilium, Jun 21, 2021.


Should I abandon AWS?

  1. Yes

  2. No

  1. I've been an AWS customer since the summer of 2014 and that's all I've been using for my Minecraft server for all the years I've been running them.

    About a year ago, I've discovered the beauty of hosts made for Minecraft server, in the past, the cheap hosts clouded my mind of how bad they were because those around me that I saw bought budget servers while I was running AWS VPS.

    I'm gonna give you the links to the Amazon Instance types and pricing so you know what machine I am talking about as you are reading this.
    Types and Specs:

    My journey through AWS
    I got my first VPS during the summer of 2014, t2.micro. I ran 1.7.9 and 1.7.10 and invited people at school as I haven't discovered advertising on the internet yet. I racked up about 60 player files on that world. I ended up making cards that contained the IP to my server and gave out to every person on my grade.

    Around the summer of 2015, I ended up moving onto a 1.8 server ended up switching to a t2.small. I didn't quite do anything significant up until the next summer (2016). The server ran with the same specs up until I updated the server to 1.11 during December this is when I added 2GB virtual ram on top of the machine I currently had as 2GB wasn't enough. I eventually changed to t2.medium after converting to spigot, and I continue to run this hardware up until May 2020.

    On May 24, 2020, I decided to move on running a network server using the r5.large machine, I bought a year without giving more research into if that was the best machine for what I was looking for. But besides that point, the machine ran pretty well. On 5 instances I ended up running the z1d.large for Spleef events and a UHC event.

    On May 28, 2021, I downgrade my r5.large to a t3.large to conserve my spendings while I am away from the server. I later downgraded again to another smaller machine t3a.small to conserve even more of my spendings.

    You might be wondering this isn't enough RAM to run my server, you are certainly right. I ended up switching my survival world to a host called EnviroMC on a dedicated so I can use the storage more freely unlike Amazon charging me a ton. I'm currently using AWS to run the proxy, MySQL, website, discord bots.

    My Opinion about Amazon's Specs & Prices
    Overall, amazon has served me very well, absolutely no downtime for all the years I used them. The prices are quite high but it's what you get for pay-as-you-go type of thing. You can save up to 66% of your spendings by reserving 3 years but that's too much so I would recommend 1 year if you do use amazon.

    Amazon's best single-core CPU is the z1d instances. They provide me enough performance, for the most part, the only downside is it most likely wouldn't be able to surpass 150 players on a survival world. Amazon is planning to release a new M1 Mac mini instance in the future marking one of the best single-core CPUs in the market. I do presume they'll cost a fortune.

    If I could describe amazon in one sentence. If you got the money then go for amazon, it serves you well for most of what you need.

    Current Hardware I am using for my server
    t3a.small - Proxy, Website, MySQL, and Discord Bots
    EnviroMC Dedicated - Survival World

    What I'm looking for from you.
    I'd like your opinion on what alternative host I should use if you believe Amazon isn't the best option. I plan to continue using amazon but if you can convince me otherwise I'd be happy.

    At the same time if you think I should continue using amazon tell me.
    #1 Ace_Monkey_Ilium, Jun 21, 2021
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2021
  2. Can't imagine using AWS for a minecraft server is cost effective at all, how much are you paying, and for what specs? These are really the two most important things, and I haven't seen you mention either.
  3. More Info
    - Budget monthly currently is around $60 (I can spend more around $100 when I'm active again) any donations I get will add on top of my budget. There have been months I've got $100 and months where I don't get any.
    - The Survival world requires at least 150GB of storage, as time goes I would require more.
    - Currently, I only run two servers, 1 VPS and 1 dedicated server.

    Past Spendings

    The machines I have been using have links attached to them. As for the ones I am using currently:
    $15.05 | AMD EPYC 7000 (2 Cores) | 2GB Ram | 100GB Storage (can be adjusted costs $0.15 per GB) TOTAL: $30
    $35 | AMD RYZEN 9 5950X (3 Cores) | 12GB Ram | Storage not capped (I would most likely receive a message if I am using too much)

    Any more info I should mention please tell me.
  4. You'll be spending more money at AWS and getting worse performance than if you were to use a host that offers game hosting. AWS would be interesting in the coming years as ARM grows in popularity and performance, though unless you need a server that scales horizontally (minigames, etc), I wouldn't recommend using AWS, or any cloud provider for medium/large Minecraft servers.
  5. As has been mentioned, AWS EC2 is best for workloads that can be scaled horizontally and can make use of autoscaling. You're essentially paying extra for that with EC2. As Minecraft servers only run as a single instance, they can't scale horizontally like this.
    Therefore a normal VPS would be much more cost-effective. For the price you're currently paying ($50/month) you could even get yourself a 32GB RAM dedicated server with a decent i7 CPU.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Any recommendation for a good VPS host in Ashburn, Virginia?
  7. Even SYS barely can do this anymore. I can't seen to think of any US providers who are doing decently good $50 units with an SSD in it. and are the cheapest I can think of and within that price range you gonna get a E3 12xxv2 on a "good day".

    Good luck running anything decent on those.
  8. OVH has a datacenter in Vint Hill which is very close. They are the cheapest host I've seen for the best performance.