EC2 versus Fargate for Amazon EKS: A Cost Comparison¶

When it comes to running workloads on Amazon Web Services (AWS), two popular choices are Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) and AWS Fargate. Both have their merits, but understanding their cost implications is crucial for making an informed decision.

In this blog, we'll dive into a cost comparison of EC2 and Fargate configurations within an Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (EKS) cluster.

The Basics: Fargate with EKS¶

Fargate provides on-demand, right-sized compute capacity for containers. You don't have to provision, configure, or scale groups of ec2 instances to run containers. You also don't need to choose server types, decide when to scale your node groups, or optimize cluster packing.

Many users evaluate Fargate because containers deployed to EKS via Fargate run inside dedicated virtual machines providing a pretty high level of security isolation. The fact that Fargate doesn’t support privileged mode also can help reduce the risk of running privileged containers.

But, what about costs?

vCPU and Memory Combos¶

To understand costs, we need to first understand how resources are allocated in Fargate. When Pods are scheduled on Fargate, the vCPU and memory reservations within the pod’s specs are mapped to one of the available combinations in Fargate. See table below for details.

vCPU value	Memory value
.25 vCPU	0.5 GB, 1 GB, 2 GB
.5 vCPU	1 GB, 2 GB, 3 GB, 4 GB
1 vCPU	2 GB, 3 GB, 4 GB, 5 GB, 6 GB, 7 GB, 8 GB
2 vCPU	Between 4 GB and 16 GB in 1-GB increments
4 vCPU	Between 8 GB and 30 GB in 1-GB increments
8 vCPU	Between 16 GB and 60 GB in 4-GB increments
16 vCPU	Between 32 GB and 120 GB in 8-GB increments

Fargate Overhead¶

Running EKS on Fargate comes with its own set of challenges and technical limitations. For each Fargate node, Amazon EKS adds an overhead of 256 MB to each Pod’s memory reservation to accommodate critical Kubernetes components (kubelet, kube-proxy, and containerd). These are required for it to become part of the EKS cluster.

Note

This overhead makes it impossible to utilize the smallest possible node size for your workloads. So. instead of using the 0.5 GB memory configuration, you'll need to upgrade to a Fargate node with 1 GB of memory, which costs more.

Limitations and Hidden Costs of Fargate¶

One of the significant limitations of Fargate is the inability to over-provision workloads. In EC2, you can bin pack workloads, allowing some to burst while others idle, maximizing resource utilization. With Fargate, this isn't an option. In addition, with Fargate, all your daemonsets need to run as sidecars. This adds to the complexity and resource consumption as well.

Cost Comparison: A Practical Example¶

With the basics out of the way, let us try and compare costs of an Amazon EKS cluster with EC2 and Fargate. Let's make the following assumptions:

Every node is running 10 workload pods
We have 4 daemonsets (monitoring, logging, security, etc)
Each workload and daemonset consumes 0.5 vCPU and 0.5 GB memory
Our EKS cluster has a total of 10 ec2 based nodes
Our EKS cluster is operating in the us-east-1 region.

Based on EC2¶

With 10 nodes in our cluster, we have a total of 100 workload pods and 40 daemonsets. The resources required per node is 7 vCPUs and 7 GB Memory.

vCPU

10 workload pods x 0.5 vCPUs
4 daemonsets x 0.5 vCPUs
Total = 7 vCPUs

Memory

10 workload pods x 0.5 GB
4 daemonsets x 0.5 GB
Total = 7 GB

The smallest ec2 instance type that can accommodate our resource requirements is t3a.2xlarge which has 8 vCPUs and 32 GB Memory.

Total Cost

Using On Demand pricing, the official AWS calculator estimates the cost to be $2,195.84 ($ 0.3008/hr x 730 hrs x 10 nodes). Users can drive down the costs further by using reserved instances. This will bring down the costs to $1,517.38 ($ 137.68 + $0.189/hr * 730 hrs *10 nodes)

Based on Fargate¶

In Fargate, a node is spawned per pod. So, in our example, we can expect to have 100 nodes with 4 sidecars per node (to accommodate the daemonsets). The resources required per node are 2.5 vCPUs (0.5/pod + 4x0.5 for daemonsets) and 2.756 GB Memory (0.5/pod + 4x0.5 for daemonsets + 0.256 GB for required k8s resources).

The closest Fargate configuration for our resource requirements is 4 vCPU, 8 GB memory. The AWS cost calculator for Fargate estimates the cost as $14,416/month.

$14,416 per month is 9x the costs of EC2 with Reserved Instances and 6x the costs of EC2 with On-Demand.

Conclusion¶

While EKS with Fargate may seem appealing due to its serverless nature and ease of use, the cost implications are significant. In our simplistic example, we learnt that using Fargate is 6-10 times more expensive than running the same workloads on EC2.

In addition, the lack of resource flexibility and the need to round up to larger configurations make Fargate less economical, particularly when you're dealing with multiple workloads within an EKS cluster.

Cost is always a significant factor in the decision-making process and for most users, EC2 will remain the more viable option for EKS. Fargate's simplicity and scalability are appealing, but the hidden costs and limitations can quickly add up, making it a less attractive choice for cost-conscious users.

Note

From a cluster design perspective, it makes more sense to use Fargate “selectively” in an EKS cluster for resources that can actually benefit from it. For example, it is a good design pattern to deploy and operate Karpenter for auto scaling in a Fargate profile with the workloads and daemonsets operating in EC2 nodes.

Learn More?¶

Learn how you can use the Rafay platform to provision and manage your Amazon EKS Clusters efficiently. Whether you are an organization starting out with your first containerized application or have a mature practice, you can leverage the Rafay platform to streamline and optimize your operations.

Read how Rafay's customers have benefited. Thanks to readers of our blog who spend time reading our product blogs and suggest interesting topics to use. Please Contact the Rafay Product Team if you would like us to write about other topics.