Graviton server and serverless functions have shown such a better performance to cost ratio, it's unsurprising Amazon is doubling down on those.
The real question is, why are other cloud providers not working on similar chips?
The real question is, why are other cloud providers not working on similar chips?
Amazon took a gamble on server ARM chips. Not a bad or blind gamble, but they had no idea if their customers would take to them at all. I'm sure if they hadn't, we'd all be sitting here saying what an obviously dumb waste of money.
I suspect the answer is simple; they are nowhere near as flush with cash to buy up a CPU company and invest years to make their own chips. It's no small endeavor that AWS has gone through to get here.
Here's an alternative equally simple explanation: ARM doesn't actually have anywhere near the level of advantage in perf/$ that Amazon's pricing would imply. The price differential on AWS isn't coming from any kind of intrinsic advantage, but from Amazon subsidizing their ARM-based compute for strategic reasons.
CPUs that need an insane amount of power and have barely any applications in mainstream computing. Not exactly a good fit to provide to customers.
> The price differential on AWS isn't coming from any kind of intrinsic advantage, but from Amazon subsidizing their ARM-based compute for strategic reasons.
By running their own CPUs, AWS doesn't have to rely on Intel's ability and willingness to ship stuff and they don't have to pay Intel's margin either.
Obviously there's no real market for Sparc or POWER in the public cloud, and there probably never was a time window for creating a viable market either.
But if they'd wanted to get into the server ARM market, they would have had the expertise in-house, there was no need to buy out some startup for the team. That their expertise was on CPUs with different microarchitectures, but that shouldn't matter all that much (didn't matter when Apple bought PA Semi to work on ARM instead of PowerPC).
> By running their own CPUs, AWS doesn't have to rely on Intel's ability and willingness to ship stuff and they don't have to pay Intel's margin either.
Right, being in control of your own destiny rather than being tied to a single supplier is a big deal, and that's one example of what I meant by the strategic reasons. Having more leverage over Intel and AMD on pricing is another. Making it harder for some customers to move their workloads away (because they're bought into ARM and other companies don't have compelling ARM offerings) is a potential third.
Not having to pay Intel's margins is a potential advantage, but requires reaching sufficient scale to offset the costs of running your own CPU team.
But for any of this to make sense, they need to successfully move a large proportion of their customers over to ARM. Just having the servers available and nobody using them does nothing. That's exactly the kind of situation where you'd want to subsidize the prices for the ARM servers and build up the customer base. That's the case even if ARM has some intrinsic perf/$ advantage; you'd still want to subsidize it to the point where you're able to saturate your ability to manufacture and install ARM servers.
Apple is designing their own cores while Amazon is just using ARM Neoverse.
And Oracle is offering Ampere instance which IIRC are quite close to Gravirton cost/performance wise.
What? AWS spun out of Amazon.com having extra servers/infa after the holiday season rush and pushed for an internal way to monetize their extra compute/storage power.
Sure, when AWS was created Amazon.com didn’t use it.
However today, Amazon.com is built entirely on AWS. It has been using EC2 and S3 since at least around 2010 (by 2013 “legacy hardware” was almost non-existent). Until 2020, it was all “hidden” behind Amazon’s internal tooling. Around 2019 there started to be a big push to just use AWS directly ie teams get AWS accounts owned by the Amazon.com org. There is still internal tooling to hook the code repo, build systems, and “pipelines” to directly deploy to AWS resources.
Meanwhile, the “serverless” I was talking about in the previous post was an internal service that hosts a Lisp dialect called Datapath. As a developer, you write some Datapath and give them the money and it executes as much as you need it to. This service is the core of Amazon.com and was actively being migrated to Graviton.
Arm on the server isn't a radical idea and been proposed for a long time. Smartphones and servers share a lot of similar requirements like especially performance per watt
Intel wasn't interested in "low-margin" markets and was generally incompetent?
Weird thing is they had StrongArm in the early 2000s.
For that kind of work it's all about power efficiency and Amazon is able to specifically design their gravitons to have just enough cache, CPU speed, management components, etc. to get the job done and nothing more. A bog standard Intel CPU is designed for any and every workload so it's going to be idling and wasting power on components and transistors you never use or care about.
you HAVE TO HAVE those CPUs on devs laptops. Otherwise it just won't work. Macs with M1/M2 are pretty much ideal setup to develop for gravitons