Are you still paying the “Intel tax” on your EC2 fleet because it’s the default choice? While Intel and AMD have dominated the data center, AWS Graviton has shifted the math of cloud economics. If you haven’t audited your architecture recently, you’re likely leaving a 40% savings margin on the table.
The architectural divide: physical cores vs hyperthreading
The most critical technical difference between these processors lies in how they handle virtual CPUs (vCPUs). In the x86 world inhabited by Intel and AMD, a vCPU is typically a single thread on a hyperthreaded core. In contrast, AWS Graviton utilizes a 1:1 mapping where every vCPU is a dedicated physical core.
This lack of simultaneous multithreading (SMT) means Graviton provides more consistent performance for multi-threaded workloads, as there is no contention for core resources between threads. However, for specific single-threaded tasks, Intel’s high clock speeds and mature instruction sets can still hold an edge. When evaluating various AWS Graviton instance types, you must look beyond the sticker price and consider how your specific application utilizes these differing architectures.
Price-performance: the 40% promise
AWS frequently claims that Graviton offers up to 40% better price-performance than comparable x86 instances. Hykell’s data consistently validates this for a wide range of cloud-native workloads, as Graviton instances generally feature an hourly rate that is approximately 20% lower than their Intel counterparts.
When you factor in the efficiency of the ARM architecture, the gains stack up significantly across generations. Independent benchmarks show Graviton3 delivering 25% better computational performance and 30% lower compute costs compared to older x86 generations like the C5 family. Furthermore, these processors are more power-efficient, often reducing energy consumption by up to 60% for compute-heavy tasks. For enterprises with strict ESG goals, this efficiency serves as a vital non-monetary performance metric.
Where Intel and AMD still lead
Choosing the cheapest instance isn’t always the best cost-performance tradeoff. There are specific scenarios where paying the premium for x86 makes technical sense, particularly in high-concurrency database environments. Intel has demonstrated 5% to 45% better MySQL read throughput performance compared to Graviton, especially on larger instances between 48 and 64 vCPUs.
If your stack relies on Windows Server or proprietary x86-only binaries, Graviton is not currently an option. Similarly, applications that cannot be easily parallelized often benefit from Intel’s raw single-threaded speed; Xeon processors can execute up to 140k more read transactions than Graviton on mid-sized instances. In these cases, AMD serves as a valuable middle ground, often priced 5-10% cheaper than Intel while maintaining full x86 compatibility.
When is it worth migrating to Graviton?
Migration is rarely a simple “flick of a switch,” but the ROI for modern stacks is often too high to ignore. You should prioritize migrating applications to Graviton instances if your workloads are containerized. Applications running on Docker or Kubernetes (EKS) are the easiest to port because you can build multi-architecture images and roll out Graviton nodes alongside x86 to shift traffic gradually.
Modern runtimes like Java, Python, Node.js, Go, and .NET Core also have mature ARM64 support. In fact, large Java applications on Graviton4 can see performance gains of up to 45% over Graviton3. Beyond runtimes, stateless web tiers represent the lowest-risk candidates for migration and often yield the most immediate impact on your monthly bill. If the overhead of re-benchmarking and validating software compatibility seems daunting, automation can act as a necessary force multiplier for your engineering team.
Automating the transition with Hykell
The “true cost” of any instance includes the engineering hours spent managing it. At Hykell, we specialize in helping organizations accelerate your Graviton gains by identifying the exact workloads that will benefit most from ARM architecture. Our platform analyzes your real-world usage patterns to ensure that a move to Graviton won’t lead to a performance regression, allowing you to migrate with confidence.
We help you layer Graviton’s native savings on top of automated rate optimization strategies like Savings Plans and Reserved Instances. By automating the identification and right-sizing of these resources, Hykell customers typically reduce their AWS spend by up to 40%. We operate on a success-based model – we only take a slice of what you save, meaning if we can’t find inefficiencies in your deployment, you don’t pay.
The debate between Graviton and x86 is about which processor provides the best throughput per dollar for your specific code. By focusing on containerized workloads and modern runtimes, you can likely capture significant savings today. To see exactly how much your specific fleet could save by optimizing your instance mix, explore our automated solutions and start your risk-free audit.