Costs
- Aurora Serverless V1
- Aurora Serverless V2
- Aurora IO Optimized MySQL
- Aurora MySQL - AWS Pricing Calculator
- RDS MySQL
- MySQL on EC2 (self managed)
- Aurora Limitless
- Aurora Global Database
Aurora vs RDS Costs
Type
-
Storage - 2TB
-
Baseline IO - 30 per second
-
Peak IO rate - 300 per second
-
Duration of peak IO activity - 360 hours per month
-
General Purpose - db.t4g, db.m7g, m6g, m6i, m5
-
Memory Optimized - db.r7g
AWS Pricing Calculator - Comparison
- Aurora MySQL
- db.r6g.xlarge - 751.04 USD
- db.r6g.large - 534.96 USD
- IO Costs extra
- Amazon RDS for MySQL
- db.r6g.xlarge - 1,242.49 USD
- 1x storage backup costs included
- Aurora Serverless v2
- 3 ACU - 713.81 USD
- 10 ACU - 1,633.61 USD
- EC2 m7g.xlarge
- 609.39 USD with EC2 Instance Savings Plans
- m5a.xlarge - 634.21 USD with On demand
- Backup Costs extra
- Aurora IO Optimized
- db.r6g.xlarge - 1,068.54 USD

Instances Cost
- db.m5.xlarge (4,16) - $351.86 - db.m5.xlarge pricing and specs - Vantage
- db.t4g.xlarge (4,16) - $243.82 - db.t4g.xlarge pricing and specs - Vantage
- db.m6g.xlarge (4,16) - $312.44 - db.m6g.xlarge pricing and specs - Vantage
- db.m7g.xlarge (4,16) - $349.67 - db.m7g.xlarge pricing and specs - Vantage
- db.r6g.xlarge (4,32) - $352.59 - db.r6g.xlarge pricing and specs - Vantage
- db.r7g.xlarge (4,32) - $397.12 - db.r7g.xlarge pricing and specs - Vantage
- Amazon EC2 R6g Instances are powered by Arm-based AWS Graviton2 processors.
- Amazon EC2 R7g instances are powered by Arm-based AWS Graviton3 processors.
- Migrating to Graviton3-based instances provide up to a 30% performance improvement and up to a 27% price/performance improvement over Graviton2-based instances on RDS
- Amazon RDS now supports AWS Graviton3-based M7g and R7g database instances | AWS re:Post
- Amazon RDS now supports M7g and R7g database instances
Choosing Instance type
Amazon RDS provides the flexibility to choose the instance type you need for your database workloads. Each instance type supports a certain number of CPUs, memory, EBS bandwidth, and network performance. The application owner should choose the instance type based on workload requirements. For example, for CPU-intensive workloads, an M family instance is better suited, whereas for a memory-intensive workload, the R family is better. As discussed in the previous section, you should only change instance types after carefully looking at your requirements. Because the majority of database workloads are memory intensive, you should evaluate using the latest offering in R and X family instances. For more information, see Amazon RDS Instance Types.
- Everything You Need to Know About AWS RDS Instance Types
- The Ultimate RDS Instance Types Guide (2024 UPDATE)
- DB instance classes - Amazon Relational Database Service
Aurora vs RDS MySQL
- https://www.percona.com/blog/2018/07/17/when-should-i-use-amazon-aurora-and-when-should-i-use-rds-mysql
- https://www.actifio.com/company/blog/post/comparing-aws-rds-for-aurora-vs-mysql-vs-postgresql
- AWS — Difference between Amazon Aurora and Amazon RDS | by Ashish Patel | Awesome Cloud | Medium
- Aurora’s unique architecture gives you more durability, scalability, resiliency, and performance when compared to RDS. Although there is a small increase in cost, it is recommend using Aurora for enterprise-level applications. If you are looking for a native high availability solution and/or read-intensive workload, then Aurora is a perfect match.
- Aurora vs RDS: How to Choose the Right AWS Database Solution
- AWS RDS MySQL vs. Aurora MySQL - House of Brick