惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

WordPress大学
WordPress大学
Microsoft Azure Blog
Microsoft Azure Blog
MongoDB | Blog
MongoDB | Blog
小众软件
小众软件
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
O
OpenAI News
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
The GitHub Blog
The GitHub Blog
CTFtime.org: upcoming CTF events
CTFtime.org: upcoming CTF events
Exploit-DB.com RSS Feed
Exploit-DB.com RSS Feed
博客园 - 聂微东
Engineering at Meta
Engineering at Meta
W
WeLiveSecurity
Hacker News: Ask HN
Hacker News: Ask HN
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
Vercel News
Vercel News
D
Docker
F
Full Disclosure
AI
AI
罗磊的独立博客
博客园 - 【当耐特】
U
Unit 42
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
Stack Overflow Blog
Stack Overflow Blog
cs.AI updates on arXiv.org
cs.AI updates on arXiv.org
P
Palo Alto Networks Blog
博客园_首页
H
Help Net Security
量子位
月光博客
月光博客
Threat Intelligence Blog | Flashpoint
Threat Intelligence Blog | Flashpoint
K
KPMG report finds enterprise disconnect between AI and its ROI | CIO
博客园 - 司徒正美
F
Fortinet All Blogs
D
DataBreaches.Net
B
Blog RSS Feed
Webroot Blog
Webroot Blog
TaoSecurity Blog
TaoSecurity Blog
S
Secure Thoughts
爱范儿
爱范儿
I
InfoQ
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
www.infosecurity-magazine.com
www.infosecurity-magazine.com
Attack and Defense Labs
Attack and Defense Labs
Application and Cybersecurity Blog
Application and Cybersecurity Blog
C
CERT Recently Published Vulnerability Notes
Martin Fowler
Martin Fowler
Blog — PlanetScale
Blog — PlanetScale
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
S
Securelist

Martin Alderson

Winners and losers in the coming AI margin collapse (part 2) GLM 5.2 and the coming AI margin collapse (part 1) Expert-aware quantisation: near-Q4 quality at near-Q2 size? A brief history of KV cache compression developments xAI is looking more like a datacentre REIT than a frontier lab Is datacentre sovereignty really that important? I went on the Built for Turbulence podcast What's going on with Gemini? Managed agents are the new Lambda Open weights are quietly closing up - and that's a problem 29th August 2026: a scenario Figma's woes compound with Claude Design A little tool to visualise MoE expert routing Has Mythos just broken the deal that kept the internet safe? What next for the compute crunch? Telnyx, LiteLLM and Axios: the supply chain crisis Using agents and Wine to move off Windows Why Claude's new 1M context length is a big deal How to use the Qwen 3.5 LLMs to OCR documents No, it doesn't cost Anthropic $5k per Claude Code user Is the AI Compute Crunch Here? Why on-device agentic AI can't keep up Using OpenCode in CI/CD for AI pull request reviews Which web frameworks are most token-efficient for AI agents? Who fixes the zero-days AI finds in abandoned software? Attack of the SaaS clones How to generate good looking reports with Claude Code, Cowork or Codex Self-improving CLAUDE.md files Wall Street just lost $285 billion because of 13 markdown files Two kinds of AI users are emerging. The gap between them is astonishing. Turns out I was wrong about TDD Why sandboxing coding agents is harder than you think The Coming AI Compute Crunch Which programming languages are most token-efficient? I ported Photoshop 1.0 to C# in 30 minutes Why I'm building my own CLIs for agents Travel agents took 10 years to collapse. Developers are 3 years in. Are we dismissing AI spend before the 6x lands? Minification isn't obfuscation - Claude Code proves it AI agents are starting to eat SaaS Has the cost of building software just dropped 90%? Are we in a GPT-4-style leap that evals can't see? I Finally Found a Use for IPv6 How I use Claude Code to manage sysadmin tasks Could Excel agents unlock $1T in economic value? Are we really repeating the telecoms crash with AI datacenters? A non-technical CFO is shipping better code than the agencies he hired Tracking MCP Server Growth Notes from MCP Dev Summit Europe: Where the Protocol Is Headed Google AI Studio API has been unreliable for the past 2 weeks What happens when coding agents stop feeling like dialup? Solving Claude Code's API Blindness with Static Analysis Tools Are OpenAI and Anthropic Really Losing Money on Inference? I gave Claude Code a folder of tax documents and used it as a professional tax agent Beyond the Hype: Real-World MCP Support Across Major AI APIs Welcome to My Blog
How I make CI/CD (much) faster and cheaper
Martin Alderson · 2025-09-28 · via Martin Alderson

One often overlooked element of the software development lifecycle is CI/CD speed, and relatively how easy it is to improve this with better hardware.

Why does it matter?

CI/CD speed really helps developers stay more efficient on their tasks. The two main benefits are:

  • Improved developer productivity. There's nothing worse than having to wait for a very long CI/CD pipeline to run for even small changes. It really breaks you out of the flow.
  • Quicker deployments. I've seen some CI/CD pipelines that take nearly an hour to test, build and deploy changes. This slows down the pace of change in your product, and can really bite you when you have a production issue that needs hotfixed as quickly as possible. In my experience this then leads to CI/CD checks being skipped to put fires out, which can then cause other regressions.

With AI agents, CI/CD can now take as long to run (if not longer) as doing small/medium sized changes. Amdahl's Law rears its ugly head again in the software development lifecycle.

The hardware is too damn slow

This applies to all CI/CD platforms that I've come across, not just GitHub Actions.

Nearly all organisations I know tend to use the standard GitHub Action Workers. You may use the larger runners even. They are convenient and don't require any operations. However, like many things in the cloud, they are slow.

The default runner GitHub actions runner has 2vCPUs and 7GB of RAM. While 7GB of RAM sounds passable, 2vCPUs is incredibly vague.

A vCPU usually refers to a thread rather than a physical core. With hyperthreading and oversubscription on shared cloud infrastructure, you're typically getting a fraction (~50%) of an already-shared physical core from a server CPU that's optimized for massive multithreading, not single-thread performance. Some EPYC CPUs designed for hyperscalers even use efficiency cores (4c/5c) which are even slower but pack more cores per die - though it doesn't look like these ones are being used here.

Doing some diagnostic checks (these may vary), I was getting consistently EPYC 7763 CPU, which is nearly 5 years old now. It also only supports AVX2 and not AVX512 which can provide a very nice additional speedup for many software engineering tasks.

Let's compare this to the latest Ryzen CPUs at the time of writing on CPU benchmark. Keep in mind we only have one physical core assigned - not 64!

CPU Benchmark Comparison

As you can see on single thread performance, the Ryzen 9950X3D is ~twice as fast at single thread performance - and despite only having one quarter of the CPU cores, is nearly as fast as the Epyc chip in multicore.

Let's compare the two side by side:

GitHub Actions (EPYC 7763) Ryzen 9950X3D Comparison
Release Year Q1 2021 Q1 2025 4 years newer
Cores Available 1 physical (2 threads) 16 cores (32 threads) 16x cores
Base/Turbo Clock 2.5 GHz / 3.5 GHz 4.3 GHz / 5.7 GHz 1.7x/1.6x
L1d Cache 32 KiB (1 core) 512 KiB (16 cores) 16x total
L1i Cache 32 KiB (1 core) 512 KiB (16 cores) 16x total
L2 Cache 512 KiB (1 core) 16 MiB (16 cores) 32x total
L3 Cache 32 MiB (shared, 0.5-8MB effective) 128 MiB (3D V-Cache) 16-256x effective
AVX Support AVX2 (256-bit) AVX-512 (512-bit) 2x wider vectors
Memory Speed DDR4-2666 (likely) DDR5-5600+ 2.1x faster
Single Thread Rating 2,518 4,737 1.88x faster
Multi Thread Rating ~2,000-5,000 (server load) 70,193 14-35x faster

As you can see, a pretty standard gaming CPU absolutely wipes the floor with the standard cloud hosted runners.

Just on single threaded CPU alone, you will basically double the speed of your pipelines on any serial CPU contended parts just by switching to a bare metal server.

I/O

It gets even worse for the standard runners though. Doing some non-scientific testing (but matches my anecdotal experience), I/O is incredibly slow.

Accessing a 10GB file on disk with dd we get:

  • Write: ~200MB/sec
  • Read: ~200MB/sec

A fairly affordable PCIe5 NVMe on bare metal will give 6000MB/sec quite easily - 30x faster. Given you probably aren't to worried about data integrity in CI/CD, you could even run them in RAID0 and get 2x the speed 🤯

It gets even worse for general small file access, with very slow IOPS (around 10,000, but varies a lot depending on neighbours), vs 1million+ on a PCIe5 NVMe. This is a real killer for software developers, with npm often installing hundreds of thousands of small files. It also explains the dreadful performance I'm sure you're aware of of apt-get.

Networking

The final problem I see with hosted runners, is that they aren't located near your infrastructure for testing - sometimes you'll have other services your pipelines need to call out to.

I seem to randomly get assigned servers in US Central and US East on GitHub Actions. However, being in the UK, that's 100ms of latency to some of our European operations. This can really add up - and if you are in Asia, Africa, LatAm or Oceania can be a total killer.

It also is a lot easier to lock down just a handful of known static IP ranges for security on these, vs having to either whitelist huge ranges or pay for GitHub Enterprise.

Overall comparison and pricing

I'd recommend getting a bare metal Ryzen server with as much RAM as you can afford. OVH is a good option, so is Hetzner.

For example, Hetzner offers a AMD Ryzen 7950X3D with 128GB of DDR5 and 2TB of PCIe4 NVMe for ~$100/month.

While not quite as fast as the above comparison, it's very close. I suspect if you move your CI/CD workflows to this, you'll find they run 2-10x faster straight away without any configuration changes - all you have to do is secure the box appropriately and setup the GitHub actions self runner, which is very simple to do.

To get roughly comparable hardware from GitHub actions you need to use the 32 core runner, which costs $0.128/min, or $5000+/month for sustained usage! And even then it likely will be (often significantly) slower for many tasks because of the lower single thread performance and IO issues (which AFAIK do not change radically with more cores).

Now, you may not have sustained usage 24/7 on your pipelines, which doesn't make it a particularly fair comparison - but even assuming a 25% usage level, it works out 10x cheaper for significantly more speed.

CI/CD is a perfect use case for bare metal - even if the machine goes offline (which in my experience is much more rare than GitHub itself going down!), its a one line change to your pipelines.yml to go back to GitHub hosted ones.

It's also an absolute no brainer if you are also seeing huge cost increases on your GitHub actions bill because you are running many more PRs and deployments with agentic software engineering.

*NB: There are SaaS providers offering this kind of setup, but the pricing is nowhere near competitive with bare metal, and in my experience the management of these is so trivial it's much better to just get a bare metal box or ten and set it up yourself. You can also get the very fastest hardware easily and choose a provider that is geographically close to you.