AWS c5n.9xlargevsAWS c5n.metal

c5n.9xlarge pairs 36 vCPUs with 96GB of RAM at $1.9440/hr On-Demand (about $1400/mo at 24×7). c5n.metal pairs 72 vCPUs with 192GB at $3.8880/hr (~$2799/mo). c5n.9xlarge is 100% cheaper per hour than c5n.metal ($1.9440/hr gap).

Because both instances are in the **c5n family**, the only thing that changes between them is sizing — same silicon, same architecture (Intel Xeon (x86_64)), same burstable/sustained behavior. The choice is purely about how much capacity you actually need: c5n.9xlarge gives you 36 vCPUs and 96GB of RAM, c5n.metal gives you 72 vCPUs and 192GB. AWS scales pricing close to linearly within a family, so picking the right size is mostly about right-sizing your workload, not getting a better deal per vCPU.

Benchmark data for at least one of these instances is still being collected, so a direct performance-per-dollar comparison isn't possible yet. Sysbench scores are 1176/32260 for c5n.9xlarge and pending for c5n.metal. Check back as the benchmark queue completes — newer-generation instances typically score 10–30% higher on single-thread and 15–50% higher on multi-core vs the previous generation in the same series.

In practice, pick c5n.9xlarge when your workload is closer to compute-optimized (CPU-bound work — batch processing, web servers under sustained load, game servers). Pick c5n.metal when it's closer to compute-optimized (CPU-bound work — batch processing, web servers under sustained load, game servers). When neither side is obviously right, the cheaper hourly rate usually wins for fault-tolerant batch workloads, while the higher single-core score usually wins for latency-sensitive web traffic. The regional pricing tables linked from each instance page below show where each is currently cheapest — sometimes a >20% regional gap flips the comparison entirely.