<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Node.js on The David Page</title><link>https://thedavidpage.pages.dev/tags/node.js/</link><description>Recent content in Node.js on The David Page</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 16 Aug 2026 09:00:00 +0700</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://thedavidpage.pages.dev/tags/node.js/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>I Benchmarked Lambda arm64 vs x86_64 on an I/O-Bound Workload So You Don't Have To</title><link>https://thedavidpage.pages.dev/posts/cloud/aws/lambda/lambda-arm64-vs-x86-io-benchmark/</link><pubDate>Sun, 16 Aug 2026 09:00:00 +0700</pubDate><guid>https://thedavidpage.pages.dev/posts/cloud/aws/lambda/lambda-arm64-vs-x86-io-benchmark/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Graviton is always pitched as cheaper. I wanted to know if it&amp;rsquo;s also faster — for a boring, I/O-bound Lambda function, not the CPU-crunching demos AWS likes to show off.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;AWS says faster. I don&amp;rsquo;t do &amp;ldquo;trust me bro&amp;rdquo; benchmarks.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;AWS markets Lambda on Graviton (arm64) as up to 20% cheaper and faster than x86_64 for &amp;ldquo;most workloads.&amp;rdquo; Most of the public benchmarks backing that up are CPU-bound — image compression, number crunching, that kind of thing. But most Lambda functions running in production aren&amp;rsquo;t doing math, they&amp;rsquo;re doing &lt;strong&gt;I/O&lt;/strong&gt;: call DynamoDB, call S3, call some other API, then wait.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>