Bare metal vs cloud has been the subject of much discussion over the past decade. For many, the public and private cloud has become the end-all-be-all solution to their server needs. However, in a surprising statement released in July 2024, AWS highlighted a growing “Cloud Repatriation” trend among its audience¹.
Cloud Repatriation: A Return to Bare Metal Servers
This “cloud repatriation” trend shift has inspired business owners to switch from cloud hosting providers back to on-premises and hosted bare metal servers. The general sentiment seems to be a complete reevaluation of how to utilize cloud and bare metal resources best. This change may have been brewing in the background for years and has only now bubbled up and begun to show itself.
Regardless, the undeniable truth is that the cloud is no longer considered the final solution to server woes. While bare metal has its dedicated supporters, its popularity has been overshadowed by the cloud for quite a while; until now.
This blog will explore what separates bare metal servers from cloud servers and hopefully prove a valuable learning opportunity for anyone interested in the nuances of the debate heading into 2025.
Performance
Benchmarking performance between cloud and bare metal servers is a complex affair. The biggest roadblock is the inconsistency between hardware and configurations, which makes it hard to create fair testing criteria. Nevertheless, some interesting benchmarks shine some light on the performance comparison.
OVHcloud’s Bare Metal Performance Analysis report sets various cloud providers against their bare metal server offerings². You can read the detailed report linked at the end for the specifics of the tests, but only the results matter in this discussion.
The report concluded that bare metal servers displayed 12% higher performance in multi-core processing than AWS’ EC2 cloud instances. As for single-core performance, all the bare metal servers included in the benchmark outpaced Amazon’s EC2 cloud VMs. In terms of random read and write storage performance, bare metal servers outpaced Amazon’s Elastic Block Storage (EBS) offering by around 40-50%.
While this is simply one performance benchmark between limited configurations, it illustrates the performance increase bare metal offers. This performance gain is a major contributing factor toward the cloud repatriation occurring in the industry.
Cost
For many, cost is the deciding factor for what resources they choose to leverage. The commonly held sentiment for a long time has been that bare metal comes at a higher cost than cloud. Many businesses have swapped to cloud servers to avail the supposed cost benefits. While the cost savings brought by the cloud may have been great at one point, cost comparisons in 2024 are less favorable.
No formal cost comparisons are available, given the nature of shifting prices. However, we can still make an evaluation. We have compiled the cost of an 8 CPU core, 16GB server from the three major cloud providers: Google Cloud³, Azure Cloud⁴, and AWS⁵.
Alongside this data, we have included the cost of similar specs bare metal servers from RS. All data is up to date as of September 2024.
| RedSwitches | Google Cloud | Azure Cloud | AWS | |
| CPU Cores | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
| Memory | 16GB | 16GB | 16GB | 16GB |
| Location | Germany | Germany | Germany | Germany |
| Price/month* | $96.88 | $293.05 | $248.2 | 218.27 USD |
As you can see, bare metal dedicated servers offer the same computing resources at half the cost of the cloud. Combine this data with the performance benchmark results, and everything starts to make sense. The return of bare metal servers to the spotlight can be attributed heavily to the cost-to-performance ratio of bare metal vs cloud.
Containerization
Containers have become a mainstay of modern software development. They are being used globally in DevOps pipelines to deliver high-performance portable app experiences. As such, we must assess the performance and cost of running containers on bare metal vs cloud VMs.
Fortunately, solid data is available to help us make a fair assessment. Ericsson estimates that operating Kubernetes containers on bare metal over cloud VMs can lead to as much as 18% savings on Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)⁶.
On the performance side, Platform9 has compiled some interesting research data from various sources⁷. Studies have shown that Kubernetes on bare metal experiences three times less latency than cloud VMs. Performance benchmarks, meanwhile, report that standalone Docker containers perform 25-30% better on bare metal vs cloud infrastructure.
Deployment Time
Deployment time is also tricky, with each provider offering different timeframes. For on-premises bare metal deployment, you can expect to take around a week to properly set-up and configure the server. This assumes you have a proper data center environment to support the infrastructure.
RedSwitches offers delivery times as low as 10 minutes for dedicated bare metal hosting for select configurations. Most cloud server service providers offer instant deployment. This is one aspect where the cloud is much easier and faster than bare metal.
Deployment time, however, is not as strong of a comparison metric. While it is important for scalability and agile development, the set-up and configuration time needed puts the cloud on the same level as bare metal.
Scalability
The cloud is undoubtedly the king of scalability. Cloud service providers offer automated scalability these days. This means that server resources dynamically change based on usage patterns and traffic. If the server experiences a lull in traffic, the autoscaler tones back the resources, saving money. When the traffic increases, more resources are allocated on the spot.
Bare metal cannot match this level of scaling. To scale bare metal, you must lease more servers or pay for hardware and network upgrades. Both incur much higher up-front costs and increase monthly costs due to higher resource consumption. This is highly unoptimized for businesses without predictable workloads. For businesses with predictable server workloads, bare metal can prove sufficient for scaling
Maintenance
Cloud servers are so popular because they demand zero maintenance. The rent paid for them includes maintenance costs, and cloud server providers have dedicated tools and techniques to maintain hardware optimally.
On-premises bare metal servers demand attention, and you are responsible for all maintenance and management. Whether it be cleaning the hardware, upgrading or replacing components, or software updates, you need to do it.
Typically, these things would be left to dedicated professionals if not for the cost. Managed bare metal servers are one way to handle this issue. Managed services take on the responsibility of maintenance from you for a small fee. While more expensive than the cloud, it is still a solid strategy for users wanting bare metal for its performance.
Customization and Control
Weighing bare metal vs cloud servers in the customization department tips the scales in favor of bare metal. When you own the server, you have complete control over what components and software it uses. You can customize the server to fit the business’s exact needs.
For example, perhaps the server is needed for machine learning activities. Finding a cloud server provider that can meet such a server’s unique requirements is challenging. With bare metal servers, you can buy optimal components and get started.
This is the big tradeoff that comes with cloud servers. Cloud setups restrict control, only allowing customization at the software level. While this is sufficient for some purposes, other activities demand hardware unlikely to be found in pre-built cloud configurations.
Security and Compliance
Cybersecurity is robust across the bare metal vs cloud comparison. Cloud providers take extra care in server security, putting measures in place to isolate VMs and prevent external attacks. Both private and public cloud providers invest heavily in ensuring the cloud servers are as secure as possible. That said, there is still risk in shared resource situations in public cloud servers.
Bare metal servers allow you to take matters into your own hands and configure your security how you want. Due to their single-tenant nature, bare metal servers are inherently advantageous since there is no potential threat from neighboring VM tenants.
Some regulations also demand businesses enforce specific security measures. The finance and medical industry are well-known for this, and need bare metal servers to isolate and protect sensitive personal records of customers.
Here is an illustrative summary of the major comparison data discussed across the article:
| Category | Bare Metal | Cloud |
| Performance | 12% higher in multi-core, outpaces in storage speed | Reliable but impacted by virtualization overhead |
| Cost | Lower cost-to-performance ratio | Pay-as-you-go can become costly with resource spikes |
| Containerization | 25-30% better performance, lower TCO by 18% | Higher latency, increased TCO with Kubernetes |
| Deployment Time | Takes up to a week to setup | Instant deployment across providers |
| Scalability | Manual, slower, and costly | Automatic, real-time scaling with dynamic resource allocation |
| Maintenance | Requires manual maintenance | Managed by the provider, zero maintenance from the user |
| Customization | Full hardware and software control | Limited to software-level customization |
| Security | Single-tenant, full control over security measures | Secure but shared environments pose additional risks |
Blurring Lines: A Hybrid Approach to Bare Metal and Cloud
Bare Metal and Cloud excel in certain areas, and the bare metal repatriation movement is about merging the two to create the best infrastructure.
On-premises or hosted bare metal servers can be deployed when performance, cost savings, and security are priorities. When scalability and swiftness are needed, the cloud can be leveraged alongside bare metal to meet requirements.
Bare metal and cloud even offer the freedom for businesses to create their in-house cloud environment. They can leverage bare metal hardware and use virtualization to create VMs in-house. The flexibility offered in a hybrid approach is unmatched, and we recommend you highly consider the prospect for your server needs.
Conclusion
Bare metal vs cloud is a debate with no true answer. The sooner you realize this and focus on bringing out the best in both, the better your chances of success. Regardless of whether you choose bare metal or cloud, always remember that the other remains a viable choice as things change.
At RedSwitches, we are doing our part to help those looking to return to bare metal and start anew. Should you wish to join the cloud repatriation movement, RS’ affordable server solutions may prove the perfect starting point for this new journey.
FAQs
- What is cloud repatriation, and why is it happening?
Cloud repatriation refers to businesses returning to on-premises and hosted bare metal servers after using cloud hosting. This trend is driven by cost-to-performance benefits and the need for more control over hardware and security, especially in high-performance use cases.
- How does the performance of bare metal servers compare to cloud servers?
Bare metal servers generally offer higher performance, with a 12% advantage in multi-core processing and significantly better single-core and storage performance than cloud solutions. Cloud servers experience performance overhead due to virtualization. - Is bare metal more expensive than cloud?
While bare metal was once considered more costly, current data suggests it can offer better value. A bare metal server with 8 CPU cores and 16 GB RAM can cost around half the price of a comparable cloud solution, especially for continuous, high-performance use cases. - What are the advantages of using bare metal for containerization?
Running Kubernetes containers on bare metal can result in up to 18% savings in total cost of ownership compared to cloud VMs. Additionally, latency is reduced by three times, and standalone Docker containers perform 25-30% better on bare metal. - How fast can bare metal and cloud servers be deployed?
Cloud servers generally offer instant deployment, while bare metal servers, particularly on-premises, may take up to a week to set up. However, certain hosted bare metal solutions, like those from RedSwitches, can be deployed in as little as 10 minutes for specific configurations. - Which is better for scalability: bare metal or cloud?
Cloud hosting is superior for scalability, offering dynamic resource scaling based on demand. Bare metal servers require manual upgrades or additional hardware, making them less suitable for unpredictable workloads but adequate for consistent demand. - Do bare metal servers require more maintenance than cloud servers?
Bone metal servers require manual maintenance, including hardware upkeep and software updates. Cloud providers handle all maintenance tasks for their infrastructure, providing a hands-off experience for users. - Can I customize my server more with bare metal or cloud?
Bare metal servers allow full hardware and software customization, making them ideal for specialized applications. In contrast, cloud servers limit customization to software, with no control over the underlying hardware. - Are bare metal servers more secure than cloud servers?
Bare metal servers offer enhanced security due to their single-tenant nature, reducing the risk from other users. Cloud environments are secure, but shared resources can introduce potential vulnerabilities, especially in multi-tenant setups. - Is there a hybrid option combining bare metal and cloud?
A hybrid approach allows businesses to use both bare metal and cloud servers. This setup leverages the strengths of each: bare metal for performance and security and cloud for scalability and flexibility.
References
1: UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), Cloud Services Market Investigation, 2024
2: OVHcloud, Bare Metal Performance Analysis, 2022
4: Microsoft Azure Cloud, Sept 2024
5: AWS Pricing Calculator, Sept 2024
6: Ericsson, Benefits of Kubernetes on bare metal cloud infrastructure, 2020
