A company runs its entire suite of applications on Amazon EC2 instances. The company plans to move the applications to containers and AWS Fargate. Within 6 months, the company plans to retire its…

Question

Options

• ACompute Savings Plans for 1 year with the No Upfront payment option
• BCompute Savings Plans for 1 year with the Partial Upfront payment option
• CEC2 Instance Savings Plans for 1 year with the All Upfront payment option
• DEC2 Reserved Instances for 1 year with the Partial Upfront payment option

• A
  3% (1)
• B
  84% (26)
• C
  10% (3)
• D
  3% (1)

Explanation

Option B is correct because Compute Savings Plans are the only purchasing option that applies to both EC2 and Fargate, making them ideal for a transition period - as usage shifts from EC2 to Fargate over 6 months, the commitment automatically covers whichever service is running. Partial Upfront provides a larger discount than No Upfront (option A), satisfying the "maximize discounts" requirement, while both options share the same flexibility advantage. Option A fails solely on discount maximization - Partial Upfront always saves more than No Upfront for the same commitment. Option C (EC2 Instance Savings Plans) are scoped to a specific EC2 instance family and region and do not cover Fargate, so once EC2 is retired, the plan becomes worthless. Option D (EC2 Reserved Instances) similarly locks you into EC2 only and would leave unused reservations after the migration.

Memory tip: Think "Compute Savings Plans = Containers included" - the word Compute signals broad flexibility across EC2, Fargate, and Lambda, while EC2 Instance Savings Plans and Reserved Instances are EC2-only traps on migration questions.

No community discussion yet for this question.