AWS m4.largevsAWS m5zn.large

m4.large pairs 2 vCPUs with 8GB of RAM at $0.1000/hr On-Demand (about $72/mo at 24×7). m5zn.large pairs 2 vCPUs with 8GB at $0.1652/hr (~$119/mo). m4.large is 65% cheaper per hour than m5zn.large ($0.0652/hr gap).

These are different generations of the same series. **m5zn.large** is the newer generation, and AWS's pattern across generations is fairly consistent: ~10–15% better single-thread, 15–30% better multi-core, and similar or modestly higher per-hour pricing — so the price/performance per dollar usually improves with each generation. **m4.large** is still available and still works (AWS doesn't retire instance types quickly), but for new workloads the newer generation is typically the better default unless you have a specific reason to pin to the older AMI or there's a meaningful regional pricing advantage today.

On raw price-per-performance, the two are roughly tied on single-thread performance per dollar (9470 vs 9159 Sysbench 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 (1454 vs 2273) are what to weigh. Spot pricing flips many of these comparisons — when m4.large drops to $0.0376/hr and m5zn.large drops to $0.0403/hr, the cheap-per-hour winner can swing meaningfully.

In practice, pick m4.large when your workload is closer to general-purpose (balanced general-purpose workloads with a 1:4 vCPU-to-memory ratio). Pick m5zn.large when it's closer to general-purpose (balanced general-purpose workloads with a 1:4 vCPU-to-memory ratio). 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.