Bedrock & Provisioned Throughput — AWS GenAI Dev Practice Question
A representative AWS Generative AI Developer (AWS GenAI Dev) exam question on Bedrock & Provisioned Throughput. Work through it below, then read why each option is right or wrong.
Short answer
The correct answer is A. Purchase 6-month provisioned throughput commitment, which provides the lowest per-unit cost and is justified by the 12-month expected lifespan, saving $9,000/month compared to on-demand.
At $6,000/month for 6-month provisioned throughput versus $15,000/month on-demand, the company saves $9,000/month (60% reduction). Even though provisioned throughput charges continuously regardless of usage patterns, the $6,000/month total cost is still dramatically lower than the $15,000/month on-demand cost. The 12-month expected lifespan justifies the 6-month commitment with minimal risk. Two consecutive 6-month commitments would save $108,000 annually.
The Question
A SaaS company's GenAI feature has predictable usage: 1,000 requests/hour during business hours (8 AM - 6 PM, Monday-Friday) and near-zero usage outside business hours. They currently use on-demand Bedrock pricing and spend $15,000/month. The finance team wants to reduce costs. Provisioned throughput for their usage level would cost $8,000/month for a 1-month commitment or $6,000/month for a 6-month commitment. The feature is stable and expected to run for at least 12 months. Which pricing strategy MINIMIZES costs?
Why A is correct
At $6,000/month for 6-month provisioned throughput versus $15,000/month on-demand, the company saves $9,000/month (60% reduction). Even though provisioned throughput charges continuously regardless of usage patterns, the $6,000/month total cost is still dramatically lower than the $15,000/month on-demand cost. The 12-month expected lifespan justifies the 6-month commitment with minimal risk. Two consecutive 6-month commitments would save $108,000 annually.
Why the other options are wrong
While provisioned throughput does charge 24/7, the comparison should be total monthly cost, not per-hour efficiency. $6,000/month (provisioned, even charging 24/7) is much less than $15,000/month (on-demand, even though usage is only 10 hours/day). The 24/7 charge is already factored into the $6,000-8,000 pricing.
The 1-month commitment at $8,000/month saves $7,000/month versus on-demand, but the 6-month commitment at $6,000/month saves an additional $2,000/month. Given the 12-month expected lifespan, the longer commitment provides better savings without meaningful risk.
Using separate accounts for different pricing tiers adds operational complexity and doesn't reduce costs below the provisioned throughput commitment. There's no cost benefit to mixing pricing tiers across accounts when the provisioned throughput commitment is already cheaper than on-demand at any utilization level.
Key idea: Bedrock & Provisioned Throughput
Why A is correct: At $6,000/month for 6-month provisioned throughput versus $15,000/month on-demand, the company saves $9,000/month (60% reduction). Even though provisioned throughput charges continuously regardless of usage patterns, the $6,000/month total cost is still dramatically lower than the $15,000/month on-demand cost. The 12-month expected lifespan justifies the 6-month commitment with minimal risk. Two consecutive 6-month commitments would save $108,000 annually. Why B is wrong: While provisioned throughput does charge 24/7, the comparison should be total monthly cost, not per-hour efficiency. $6,000/month (provisioned, even charging 24/7) is much less than $15,000/month (on-demand, even though usage is only 10 hours/day). The 24/7 charge is already factored into the $6,000-8,000 pricing. Why C is wrong: The 1-month commitment at $8,000/month saves $7,000/month versus on-demand, but the 6-month commitment at $6,000/month saves an additional $2,000/month. Given the 12-month expected lifespan, the longer commitment provides better savings without meaningful risk. Why D is wrong: Using separate accounts for different pricing tiers adds operational complexity and doesn't reduce costs below the provisioned throughput commitment. There's no cost benefit to mixing pricing tiers across accounts when the provisioned throughput commitment is already cheaper than on-demand at any utilization level. On the AWS GenAI Dev exam, questions in the "Operational Efficiency" domain test whether you can map a scenario's constraints to the right choice. Read the requirement carefully, eliminate options that violate any single constraint, and pick the one that satisfies all of them with the least operational overhead.
Ready to see how you'd score?
Take the free practice quiz and find out which AWS Generative AI Developer - Professional domains you need to focus on. No signup required.
Practice 5 similar questions
Same cert, same or adjacent domain. Use these after reviewing the explanation.