Cloud Cost Optimization AWS Azure: Expert Strategies

Cloud infrastructure has fundamentally transformed how modern software is built and delivered — but without disciplined financial governance, it can just as easily become an organization's largest uncontrolled expense. Senior architects and engineering leaders across Europe and beyond are increasingly finding that their AWS and Azure bills are growing faster than their business value, a symptom of unchecked sprawl, over-provisioning, and a lack of systematic cost visibility. Mastering cloud cost optimization for AWS and Azure is no longer a nice-to-have capability; it is a core engineering discipline that separates high-performing teams from those perpetually firefighting budget overruns.

At Nordiso, we work with organizations running complex, multi-service cloud architectures on both AWS and Azure, and we have observed a consistent pattern: the majority of wasted cloud spend stems from a handful of addressable root causes. Reserved capacity going unused, idle compute instances left running after load tests, over-allocated database tiers, and egress charges that nobody budgeted for — these are the bleeding wounds that drain cloud budgets. The good news is that each of these problems has a well-defined, engineering-led solution. This guide walks through the most impactful cloud cost optimization AWS Azure strategies, backed by real-world implementation experience and concrete technical examples.

Whether you are operating a SaaS platform on AWS EC2 and RDS, running microservices on Azure Kubernetes Service, or managing a hybrid landscape that spans both clouds, the principles and techniques covered here will give you a systematic framework to reduce waste, align spend with business value, and build cost-awareness directly into your engineering culture.

---

You cannot optimize what you cannot see. Before any cost reduction strategy can be effective, teams must establish deep, granular visibility into where every dollar is going across their cloud accounts. Both AWS and Azure provide native tooling for this — AWS Cost Explorer and AWS Cost and Usage Reports (CUR), and Azure Cost Management plus Azure Advisor — but raw data alone is insufficient without a disciplined tagging and account structure strategy. The first step any architect should take is enforcing a consistent tagging taxonomy across all resources: at minimum, tags for environment, team, service, and cost center should be mandatory and enforced via AWS Service Control Policies (SCPs) or Azure Policy.

On AWS, enabling cost allocation tags in the Billing Console allows you to break down charges by any resource tag dimension. A practical approach is to enforce tags through infrastructure-as-code. For example, in a Terraform module deploying an EC2 Auto Scaling group, you would define a default_tags block at the provider level to ensure every resource inherits baseline tags without relying on individual engineer discipline. Combining this with AWS Organizations and dedicated accounts per workload gives you clean cost boundaries that map directly to business units or product lines. Once this foundation is in place, Cost Explorer's grouping and filtering capabilities become genuinely powerful for identifying anomalies and trends.

provider "aws" {
  region = "eu-west-1"
  default_tags {
    tags = {
      Environment = var.environment
      Team        = var.team_name
      Service     = var.service_name
      CostCenter  = var.cost_center
    }
  }
}

On the Azure side, Azure Cost Management (now integrated into the Azure Portal under the same namespace as Microsoft Cost Management) provides similar capabilities, including budget alerts that can trigger automation workflows. A particularly powerful pattern is configuring budget alerts to invoke an Azure Automation runbook or Logic App that automatically scales down non-production environments outside business hours. This kind of event-driven cost governance transforms budgets from passive reporting tools into active enforcement mechanisms. Combining Management Groups, Subscriptions, and Resource Groups with Azure Policy assignments for mandatory tags gives Azure architectures the same cost boundary clarity that AWS Organizations provides on the Amazon side.

---

Across virtually every cloud environment we have assessed at Nordiso, compute over-provisioning is the single largest source of waste. Engineering teams, understandably cautious about performance regressions, tend to provision instances that are significantly larger than workload requirements actually demand. AWS Compute Optimizer and Azure Advisor both use machine learning to analyze CloudWatch and Azure Monitor metrics respectively, producing right-sizing recommendations that account for CPU, memory, network, and disk I/O utilization patterns over a configurable lookback period. Acting on these recommendations systematically — rather than sporadically — can yield 20–40% compute cost reductions without any architectural changes.

On AWS, right-sizing is not just about moving to a smaller instance size; it also involves selecting the correct instance family for the workload profile. A compute-intensive batch processing job that was historically running on m5.4xlarge instances might be a natural candidate for c6i.2xlarge instances — fewer vCPUs mapped more closely to the actual parallelism of the workload, with a lower per-unit price for compute-optimized tasks. Similarly, memory-intensive workloads such as in-memory caching layers or large JVM-based services belong on r6i or r6g (Graviton) instance families, where the memory-to-vCPU ratio is optimized and the Graviton-based options offer up to 40% better price-performance compared to equivalent x86 instances. The migration path for Graviton adoption has matured significantly — most Java, Python, Go, and Node.js workloads compile and run without modification.

Azure offers a comparable right-sizing journey, with the added dimension of the Bsv2 and Bv3 burstable VM series for workloads with spiky, intermittent CPU demands. Many development, staging, and low-traffic API services that teams deploy on Standard_D4s_v5 instances are prime candidates for Standard_B4ms burstable VMs, which accumulate CPU credits during idle periods and spend them during peak bursts — often at 30–50% lower cost for the same nominal specification. Azure Advisor's cost recommendations surface these opportunities automatically, but architects should validate them against actual p95 and p99 CPU utilization data from Azure Monitor before migrating production workloads.

---

One of the most impactful levers in cloud cost optimization for AWS and Azure is committing to reserved capacity for stable, predictable workloads. AWS Savings Plans and Reserved Instances, along with Azure Reserved VM Instances (RIs) and the Azure Savings Plan for Compute, can reduce on-demand costs by 40–72% depending on the commitment term (1-year or 3-year) and payment option (all upfront, partial upfront, or no upfront). The key word, however, is intelligent commitment — buying reservations for the wrong instance types or locking in more capacity than the workload actually consumes simply shifts the form of waste from pay-as-you-go overspend to reservation underutilization.

AWS Savings Plans are generally more flexible than traditional Reserved Instances and are the recommended approach for most modern workloads. Compute Savings Plans apply automatically to any EC2 instance usage regardless of region, instance family, OS, or tenancy, and also cover AWS Lambda and Fargate. This flexibility makes them suitable for environments where instance types are regularly right-sized or where containerized workloads are migrating between Fargate and EC2-based ECS/EKS clusters. A practical strategy is to cover your steady-state baseline compute with 1-year Compute Savings Plans (aiming for roughly 70% coverage of your average monthly EC2 spend) and let the remaining variable and peak capacity run on-demand or Spot. AWS Cost Explorer's Savings Plans purchase recommendations will generate coverage and utilization projections based on your trailing 60 days of spend — treat these as a starting point and apply engineering judgment before committing.

On Azure, Reserved VM Instances operate on a similar principle. Azure's instance size flexibility within the same VM series (for example, being able to share a D-series reservation across Standard_D2s_v5 and Standard_D4s_v5 instances in the same region) reduces the risk of reservation underutilization when teams right-size VMs during the commitment period. For Azure SQL Database and Azure Cosmos DB, reserved capacity purchases follow the same 1-year/3-year model and consistently deliver the largest percentage savings of any Azure commitment purchase, often exceeding 60% for database tiers that run continuously. Architects managing data-heavy platforms should treat database reserved capacity as a first priority commitment purchase.

---

Beyond compute pricing models, sustainable cloud cost optimization on AWS and Azure requires embedding cost-efficient architectural patterns into system design from the outset. Several patterns consistently deliver significant savings across the cloud environments Nordiso's teams work with.

AWS Spot Instances and Azure Spot VMs offer access to spare cloud capacity at discounts of 60–90% compared to on-demand pricing, with the trade-off of potential interruption. For fault-tolerant workloads — batch processing pipelines, machine learning training jobs, integration test suites in CI/CD pipelines, and data transformation jobs — this trade-off is entirely acceptable and the savings are dramatic. On AWS, using EC2 Auto Scaling groups with a mixed instances policy that combines multiple Spot instance types across availability zones significantly reduces interruption probability while maintaining the cost benefit. A well-configured EKS cluster running data processing workloads on a mixed on-demand/Spot node group can reduce compute costs by 60% compared to a fully on-demand equivalent.

Data egress costs are one of the most frequently overlooked dimensions of cloud spend. On AWS, transferring data between Availability Zones within the same region costs $0.01/GB in each direction — a figure that adds up rapidly in microservice architectures with high inter-service communication volumes. Consolidating services that communicate frequently into the same AZ for their primary traffic paths, or using AWS PrivateLink to reduce cross-AZ data transfer, can meaningfully reduce these charges. Similarly, S3 Intelligent-Tiering automatically moves objects between access tiers based on usage patterns and is the recommended default storage class for any bucket with unpredictable or mixed access patterns. On Azure, Azure Blob Storage lifecycle management policies can automatically transition blobs from Hot to Cool to Archive tiers based on last-modified or last-accessed dates, reducing storage costs by up to 80% for infrequently accessed data without any application-level changes.

Migrating appropriate workloads to serverless compute — AWS Lambda, Azure Functions, or Azure Container Apps — fundamentally shifts the cost model from capacity reservation to pure consumption. For APIs with highly variable traffic patterns, event-driven processors, and scheduled background jobs, serverless typically delivers significant cost reductions because you pay only for actual execution time and invocations rather than idle instance hours. The critical design consideration is ensuring function execution times and memory configurations are tuned — Lambda's memory setting directly controls CPU allocation, and over-allocating memory wastes money while under-allocating extends execution duration and paradoxically increases cost. AWS Lambda Power Tuning, an open-source Step Functions state machine, automates this optimization by testing your function at multiple memory configurations and plotting the cost-performance curve.

---

Technical optimizations alone are insufficient if cost awareness is confined to a single platform team or finance department. The FinOps framework — now widely adopted across cloud-mature organizations — establishes the principle that engineering teams who build and deploy cloud resources should also be accountable for their cost. Implementing this in practice means surfacing cost data in engineering dashboards alongside performance and reliability metrics, setting per-team or per-service cost budgets with automated alerts, and making cost impact a regular part of architecture review discussions. Both AWS and Azure provide APIs that enable cost data to be pulled into internal developer portals such as Backstage, making spend visible in the same context where engineers are already working.

Proactive cost governance through automation prevents expensive mistakes before they appear on the monthly bill. AWS Config rules and Azure Policy can enforce constraints such as preventing the deployment of instance types above a specified size tier in non-production environments, requiring lifecycle policies on all S3 or Azure Blob Storage buckets, and mandating that all Auto Scaling groups have a maximum instance count defined. Combining these policy guardrails with Infrastructure-as-Code linting tools — such as Checkov or Infracost — enables cost impact to be evaluated at pull request time, before any resource is actually provisioned. Infracost, for example, integrates directly into GitHub Actions or Azure DevOps pipelines and produces a cost diff comment on every PR that modifies Terraform, giving engineers immediate feedback on the financial impact of their infrastructure changes.

---

Effective cloud cost optimization for AWS and Azure is not a one-time project but a continuous engineering practice that spans visibility, architecture, pricing strategy, and organizational culture. The organizations that achieve the best results are those that treat cost efficiency with the same rigor they apply to system reliability and security — embedding it into design reviews, automating governance through policy-as-code, and holding engineering teams accountable for the financial outcomes of their technical decisions. From right-sizing compute and adopting Graviton or Azure Arm-based instances, to committing intelligently to Savings Plans and Reserved Instances, to eliminating unnecessary data transfer costs and embracing serverless where appropriate, every layer of the stack offers meaningful optimization opportunities.

At Nordiso, our cloud architecture and platform engineering teams work with technology organizations at every stage of cloud maturity — from establishing foundational cost visibility to redesigning architectures for maximum efficiency on AWS and Azure. If your organization is ready to bring the same systematic, engineering-led approach to cloud cost optimization on AWS and Azure that we apply for our clients across Finland and beyond, we would welcome the conversation. The next significant reduction in your cloud bill is closer than you might think.