AWS c6a.largevsAWS c6a.xlarge

c6a.large pairs 2 vCPUs with 4GB of RAM at $0.0765/hr On-Demand (about $55/mo at 24×7). c6a.xlarge pairs 4 vCPUs with 8GB at $0.1530/hr (~$110/mo). c6a.large is 100% cheaper per hour than c6a.xlarge ($0.0765/hr gap).

Because both instances are in the **c6a family**, the only thing that changes between them is sizing — same silicon, same architecture (AMD EPYC (x86_64)), same burstable/sustained behavior. The choice is purely about how much capacity you actually need: c6a.large gives you 2 vCPUs and 4GB of RAM, c6a.xlarge gives you 4 vCPUs and 8GB. 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.

On raw price-per-performance, the two are c6a.large delivers ~98% more single-thread Sysbench score per dollar (52850 vs 26641 points per $1/hr). That's the cleanest signal we have for "which one runs your workload faster per dollar," but it only matters if your workload is single-thread-bound; for parallel workloads the multi-core scores (4473 vs 9056) are what to weigh. Spot pricing flips many of these comparisons — when c6a.large drops to $0.0293/hr and c6a.xlarge drops to $0.0672/hr, the cheap-per-hour winner can swing meaningfully.

In practice, pick c6a.large when your workload is closer to compute-optimized (CPU-bound work — batch processing, web servers under sustained load, game servers). Pick c6a.xlarge 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.