AWS r8g.24xlargevsAWS r8g.metal-24xl

r8g.24xlarge pairs 96 vCPUs with 768GB of RAM at $5.6554/hr On-Demand (about $4072/mo at 24×7). r8g.metal-24xl pairs 96 vCPUs with 768GB at $5.6554/hr (~$4072/mo). Both are priced identically per hour on-demand.

r8g.24xlarge (memory-optimized, AWS Graviton (ARM64)) and r8g.metal-24xl (memory-optimized, AWS Graviton (ARM64)) target different workload shapes. The vCPU:RAM ratios are different (96:768 vs 96:768), and depending on the architectures involved you may also see meaningful single-thread performance and per-hour-cost differences. This kind of cross-category comparison is most useful when you're early in the design phase and not yet sure whether your workload is CPU-bound, memory-bound, or balanced — once that's clear, the right pick is usually obvious.

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 pending for r8g.24xlarge and 3338/319512 for r8g.metal-24xl. 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 r8g.24xlarge when your workload is closer to memory-optimized (memory-bound work — in-memory databases, real-time analytics, large caches). Pick r8g.metal-24xl when it's closer to memory-optimized (memory-bound work — in-memory databases, real-time analytics, large caches). 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.