2 Answers
- Newest
- Most votes
- Most comments
0
Hello.
As you know, it is possible to host React.js on S3.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/prescriptive-guidance/latest/patterns/deploy-a-react-based-single-page-application-to-amazon-s3-and-cloudfront.html
In terms of server management costs, I think hosting with S3 will be cheaper.
There shouldn't be much of a difference in data transfer charges between EC2 and S3.
https://aws.amazon.com/s3/pricing/?nc1=h_ls
https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/on-demand/?nc1=h_ls#Data_Transfer
0
S3 will be cheaper , you only pay storage. Data transfer will apply to both
answered 6 months ago
Relevant content
- asked a year ago
AWS OFFICIALUpdated 8 months ago- AWS OFFICIALUpdated a year ago
- AWS OFFICIALUpdated 2 years ago
- I host a website on an EC2 instance. How do I allow my users to connect on HTTP (80) or HTTPS (443)?AWS OFFICIALUpdated 2 years ago
Agreed, If you compare monthly storage price of 1 GB in S3 to the hourly cost of your instance of choice, you'll be able to compute the savings
If you put CloudFront in front of the S3 bucket, the data transfer costs will generally lower than serving from S3 directly plus it has quite a generous free tier.
https://aws.amazon.com/cloudfront/pricing/