Containers are available in public beta for simple, and programmable compute(blog.cloudflare.com)

78 pointsby rita3ko3 days ago8 comments

develatio3 days ago
If my math is not wrong, running a single “standard” container during 1 month (non-stop) would cost ~55$.
This looks extremely expensive for anything other than a simple demo/toy project. I can’t think of a reason I’d use this for heavy services instead of using [anything else]. Maybe I’m not seeing the use-case?
- NathanFlurry3 days ago
  A 1 CPU + 2 GB of RAM + 50 GB ephemeral storage on Cloudflare Containers is $74.90.
  The same on Fly Machines is $31.00 (performance-1x, varies by region). Fly Machines has the same sleeping functionality as Cloudflare.
  Rivet Containers also has a similar price point of $29.40, but takes a different approach to sleeping (opts for optimizing coldstarts + autoscaling over snapshotting). (I work at Rivet)
  - blixt3 days ago
    I think Modal, which AFAIK has a similar feature set to Cloudflare Containers, also works out very favorably price wise compared to Cloudflare Containers.
- rochoa3 days ago
  Math is not wrong for the standard instance.
  This is about using and abusing the _on-demand_ part.
  The first example in the Getting started goes with sleepAfter = '10s'.
- Havoc3 days ago
  It’s likely aimed at bursty workloads. ie not one instance but a use case that fluctuates between 1 and 100 instances.
- aiisahik3 days ago
  I don't think you can calculate the cost of serverless compute this way. What containers do you have that run "non-stop"?
  If the container doesn't run any workloads, it doesn't cost you anything. Most of the compute i pay for sit idle most of the time.
  This is amazing pricing.
  - develatio3 days ago
    Say I want to deploy a service that is currently receiving 1rps at a constant rate, no upticks, no gaps. Wouldn’t that be the cost? If the answer is “yes”, then no, that is a terrible pricing.
    sofixa3 days ago
    Realistically, almost nobody has this type of usage. And for those that do, yes, serverless autoscaling up from zero is not appropriate.
    develatio3 days ago
    True. Most services (unless your service is a demo/toy project, as I stated earlier) have way more traffic. It might not be evenly distributed though the day, but if you add all the CPU time in a day, I’m sure it will exceed 24h. So that leaves me with the question for who is this? Developers that are starting and want to deploy something small?
    rohan_2 days ago
    Don’t host your website on containers, that’s what workers are for
- 0xy3 days ago
  And the gigantic AWS-tier bandwidth costs. This misses the mark by a lot. Classic example of pricing ruining a launch of decent technology.
  It seems like always-on containers are not viable on this, so what's the point?
NathanFlurry3 days ago
We published an in-depth comparison between Cloudflare Containers, Fly Machines, and Rivet Containers: https://rivet.gg/blog/2025-06-24-cloudflare-containers-vs-ri...
(I work at Rivet)
kmf3 days ago
(I work at Cloudflare) We shipped a Containers 101 video today showing how to get up and running. YT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyOaxMY4eNo
dinvlad3 days ago
Egress is $25/TB unlike their other stuff. No thanks
Havoc3 days ago
Sounds similar to what bunny is offering
Think CF lets you rate limit right?some form of it seems necessary with those egress rates
Zerpiez3 days ago
Would UDP services and anycast DNS be supported in the future e.g. to be able to run dnsdist or similar services.
- NathanFlurry3 days ago
  They stated on the livestream they're considering TCP, but I suspect UDP is not coming soon since Workers themselves don't support UDP. All traffic going to Cloudflare Containers must be "proxied" through the Workers platform.
ttoinou3 days ago
So can we now host a whole website distributed in all regions on the edge with Cloudflare workers + containers ?
- kentonv2 days ago
  You've been able to do that for years, just using Workers (using Durable Objects for storage).
3 days ago
undefined