Support Plans practice questions

A company runs a production workload on AWS and needs technical support that includes phone and email access with a response time of less than 1 hour for critical system failures. The company also wants architectural guidance for cost optimization and performance improvement. The company currently has an AWS account with the Basic Support plan. Which AWS Support plan should the company choose to meet these requirements at the most cost-effective price?

Trap 1: Basic Support

Basic Support is included at no charge with every AWS account and covers only billing and account issues; it does not provide access to Cloud Support engineers for technical troubleshooting via email, phone, or chat. Because it lacks technical support and architectural guidance entirely, it cannot meet the requirement to operate a production workload with any troubleshooting assistance.

Trap 2: Developer Support

The Developer Support plan is intended for development and testing environments, offering email-based technical support during business hours with a best-effort response time of 12 hours for critical cases. It has no phone access and does not provide a 1-hour critical response, so a production incident could go unresolved far too long. Its architectural guidance is also general rather than deeply tailored to cost and performance, making it inadequate for this requirement.

Trap 3: Enterprise Support

The Enterprise Support plan provides a 15-minute response time for critical cases and includes a Technical Account Manager (TAM) and proactive guidance. However, it is more expensive than the Business plan and provides more than what is required. The Business plan is sufficient and more cost-effective.

A
Basic Support
Why wrong: Basic Support is included at no charge with every AWS account and covers only billing and account issues; it does not provide access to Cloud Support engineers for technical troubleshooting via email, phone, or chat. Because it lacks technical support and architectural guidance entirely, it cannot meet the requirement to operate a production workload with any troubleshooting assistance.
B
Developer Support
Why wrong: The Developer Support plan is intended for development and testing environments, offering email-based technical support during business hours with a best-effort response time of 12 hours for critical cases. It has no phone access and does not provide a 1-hour critical response, so a production incident could go unresolved far too long. Its architectural guidance is also general rather than deeply tailored to cost and performance, making it inadequate for this requirement.
C
Business Support
The Business Support plan includes phone and email support, a 1-hour response time for critical failures, and access to architectural guidance for cost optimization and performance. It is the most cost-effective plan that satisfies all the stated requirements.
D
Enterprise Support
Why wrong: The Enterprise Support plan provides a 15-minute response time for critical cases and includes a Technical Account Manager (TAM) and proactive guidance. However, it is more expensive than the Business plan and provides more than what is required. The Business plan is sufficient and more cost-effective.

Question 2mediummultiple choice

A company is launching a critical production application on AWS. The operations team requires technical support with a response time of less than 1 hour for urgent system issues. They also need access to AWS Trusted Advisor best practice checks for cost optimization and security. Which AWS Support plan meets these requirements at the lowest cost?

Trap 1: AWS Developer Support

AWS Developer Support is intended for development and test workloads, not production. Its fastest (Severity 1) response target is 12 hours, which is far slower than the required under-1-hour urgent response. In addition, Trusted Advisor access is limited to the 7 core checks, not full best-practice checks. Therefore Developer Support is insufficient for a critical production application and cannot be the lowest-cost qualifying option.

Trap 2: AWS Enterprise On-Ramp Support

The Enterprise On-Ramp plan provides a 30-minute response for urgent issues and full Trusted Advisor access. However, it is more expensive than the Business plan and includes additional features not required, making it not the lowest-cost option that meets the stated requirements.

Trap 3: AWS Enterprise Support

The Enterprise Support plan offers a 15-minute response for urgent issues and full Trusted Advisor access. It is the most expensive plan and includes features not needed for the requirement, so it is not the lowest-cost option.

A
AWS Developer Support
Why wrong: AWS Developer Support is intended for development and test workloads, not production. Its fastest (Severity 1) response target is 12 hours, which is far slower than the required under-1-hour urgent response. In addition, Trusted Advisor access is limited to the 7 core checks, not full best-practice checks. Therefore Developer Support is insufficient for a critical production application and cannot be the lowest-cost qualifying option.
B
AWS Business Support
The Business Support plan offers a 1-hour response for urgent (severity 1) cases and full access to Trusted Advisor best practice checks. This meets the requirements at the lowest cost among plans that satisfy these needs.
C
AWS Enterprise On-Ramp Support
Why wrong: The Enterprise On-Ramp plan provides a 30-minute response for urgent issues and full Trusted Advisor access. However, it is more expensive than the Business plan and includes additional features not required, making it not the lowest-cost option that meets the stated requirements.
D
AWS Enterprise Support
Why wrong: The Enterprise Support plan offers a 15-minute response for urgent issues and full Trusted Advisor access. It is the most expensive plan and includes features not needed for the requirement, so it is not the lowest-cost option.

Question 3mediummultiple choice

A company runs a customer-facing web application on Amazon EC2 instances. The company wants to have access to technical support with a guaranteed response time of 1 hour for critical production system failures. The company also needs access to AWS Trusted Advisor to get cost optimization recommendations. Which AWS Support plan meets these requirements?

Trap 1: AWS Basic Support

AWS Basic Support is the free tier and provides no technical support engineers for troubleshooting operational issues; you can only open account and billing contact cases. Trusted Advisor is limited to six core security checks, so cost optimization recommendations are completely unavailable. If a customer-facing production system fails, the company would have no contractual response time at all, so Basic Support clearly fails the 1-hour critical response requirement.

Trap 2: AWS Developer Support

AWS Developer Support is designed for early-stage experimentation and development, so its fastest critical escalation is 12 hours for a production system down, far slower than the required 1-hour response. It also includes only a subset of Trusted Advisor checks and no cost optimization recommendations, meaning the company would miss the financial analysis it needs. While Developer Support provides access to technical support engineers, it fails both the response-time and cost-optimization requirements, so it is not sufficient.

Trap 3: AWS Enterprise Support

AWS Enterprise Support provides a 15-minute response time for critical cases, which exceeds the requirement, but it also comes with a higher cost and additional features like a Technical Account Manager. While it would meet the need, it is not the most cost-effective plan that directly matches the stated requirements. The Business plan is the correct choice.

A
AWS Basic Support
Why wrong: AWS Basic Support is the free tier and provides no technical support engineers for troubleshooting operational issues; you can only open account and billing contact cases. Trusted Advisor is limited to six core security checks, so cost optimization recommendations are completely unavailable. If a customer-facing production system fails, the company would have no contractual response time at all, so Basic Support clearly fails the 1-hour critical response requirement.
B
AWS Developer Support
Why wrong: AWS Developer Support is designed for early-stage experimentation and development, so its fastest critical escalation is 12 hours for a production system down, far slower than the required 1-hour response. It also includes only a subset of Trusted Advisor checks and no cost optimization recommendations, meaning the company would miss the financial analysis it needs. While Developer Support provides access to technical support engineers, it fails both the response-time and cost-optimization requirements, so it is not sufficient.
C
AWS Business Support
AWS Business Support is the correct tier because it includes full Trusted Advisor checks, including cost optimization, and guarantees a 1-hour response time for severity-1 (production system down) incidents. This is exactly the service level the company requires, and Business Support also provides 24x7 phone, email, and chat access to cloud support engineers. For a customer-facing web application, this is the minimum plan that meets the stated operational and cost-optimization needs.
D
AWS Enterprise Support
Why wrong: AWS Enterprise Support provides a 15-minute response time for critical cases, which exceeds the requirement, but it also comes with a higher cost and additional features like a Technical Account Manager. While it would meet the need, it is not the most cost-effective plan that directly matches the stated requirements. The Business plan is the correct choice.

Question 4mediummultiple choice

A company needs an AWS support plan that provides access to online training, use case guidance, and architectural support for non-production environments. Which is the minimum plan that provides direct technical guidance from AWS engineers (not just documentation)?

Trap 1: Basic Support

Basic Support is the free tier that comes with every AWS account, but it provides no direct access to AWS Support engineers at all. It only includes documentation, AWS Health Dashboard notifications, and a limited subset of Trusted Advisor checks. Since the question specifically asks for direct technical guidance from AWS engineers, Basic Support cannot be the correct answer.

Trap 2: Business Support

Business Support does include direct technical guidance, but it goes beyond the minimum required by adding 24/7 phone and chat access to Cloud Support Engineers. It also includes full Trusted Advisor checks and third-party software support, which are unnecessary for a basic technical guidance need. Therefore, it is a valid but overqualified option, not the minimum plan.

Trap 3: Enterprise Support

Enterprise Support is the highest and most expensive AWS Support tier, offering features like a dedicated Technical Account Manager (TAM), proactive architectural reviews, and a 15-minute response time for business-critical issues. While it certainly provides direct technical guidance, it far exceeds the minimum requirement asked in the question. Choosing Enterprise would be wasteful when Developer Support already satisfies the stated need.

A
Basic Support
Why wrong: Basic Support is the free tier that comes with every AWS account, but it provides no direct access to AWS Support engineers at all. It only includes documentation, AWS Health Dashboard notifications, and a limited subset of Trusted Advisor checks. Since the question specifically asks for direct technical guidance from AWS engineers, Basic Support cannot be the correct answer.
B
Developer Support
Developer Support is the minimum AWS Support plan that provides direct technical guidance from AWS engineers. It offers email access to Cloud Support Associates during business hours only, making it the cheapest paid tier with actual engineer interaction. This matches the question's requirement for the lowest-level plan with direct technical help.
C
Business Support
Why wrong: Business Support does include direct technical guidance, but it goes beyond the minimum required by adding 24/7 phone and chat access to Cloud Support Engineers. It also includes full Trusted Advisor checks and third-party software support, which are unnecessary for a basic technical guidance need. Therefore, it is a valid but overqualified option, not the minimum plan.
D
Enterprise Support
Why wrong: Enterprise Support is the highest and most expensive AWS Support tier, offering features like a dedicated Technical Account Manager (TAM), proactive architectural reviews, and a 15-minute response time for business-critical issues. While it certainly provides direct technical guidance, it far exceeds the minimum requirement asked in the question. Choosing Enterprise would be wasteful when Developer Support already satisfies the stated need.

Question 5easymultiple choice

Which AWS support plan is the minimum level required to access the full set of AWS Trusted Advisor checks?

Trap 1: Basic

Basic support includes only 7 core Trusted Advisor security checks, leaving cost optimization, performance, fault tolerance, and service limit checks unavailable. Since the free Basic tier is intended for experimental or non-production workloads, it does not unlock the full Trusted Advisor suite. Therefore, Basic is insufficient as the plan that provides all checks.

Trap 2: Developer

Developer support also limits Trusted Advisor to just the 7 core security checks, not the full suite. This tier is designed for development and test environments, not production workloads, so it lacks Business-level features such as full Trusted Advisor checks and 24/7 access to Cloud Support Engineers. As a result, Developer does not meet the requirement for full checks.

Trap 3: Enterprise

Enterprise support also provides full Trusted Advisor access, but it is not the minimum level needed; Business already offers the same complete suite at a lower cost. Enterprise adds extra premium features like a Technical Account Manager (TAM) and White Glove case handling, but these are not required for accessing all Trusted Advisor checks. Thus, choosing Enterprise would be correct if cost were not a factor, but it is not the minimum required plan.

A
Basic
Why wrong: Basic support includes only 7 core Trusted Advisor security checks, leaving cost optimization, performance, fault tolerance, and service limit checks unavailable. Since the free Basic tier is intended for experimental or non-production workloads, it does not unlock the full Trusted Advisor suite. Therefore, Basic is insufficient as the plan that provides all checks.
B
Developer
Why wrong: Developer support also limits Trusted Advisor to just the 7 core security checks, not the full suite. This tier is designed for development and test environments, not production workloads, so it lacks Business-level features such as full Trusted Advisor checks and 24/7 access to Cloud Support Engineers. As a result, Developer does not meet the requirement for full checks.
C
Business
Business support is the minimum plan that unlocks the complete Trusted Advisor suite, covering all checks in cost optimization, performance, security, fault tolerance, and service limits. This tier is designed for production workloads and also includes 24/7 access to Cloud Support Engineers and full Trusted Advisor API access. Therefore, Business is the correct answer to the question asking for the minimum plan with full checks.
D
Enterprise
Why wrong: Enterprise support also provides full Trusted Advisor access, but it is not the minimum level needed; Business already offers the same complete suite at a lower cost. Enterprise adds extra premium features like a Technical Account Manager (TAM) and White Glove case handling, but these are not required for accessing all Trusted Advisor checks. Thus, choosing Enterprise would be correct if cost were not a factor, but it is not the minimum required plan.

Question 6mediummultiple choice

A company uses AWS Support and wants to know which plan provides the fastest response time for a business-critical system outage causing complete service disruption.

Trap 1: Business Support (1-hour response)

For production system down, Business Support provides a 1-hour response for the highest severity (production system down) in AWS Support plans. However, it is not the fastest because Enterprise On-Ramp improves to 30 minutes, and Enterprise Support reduces to 15 minutes. So while it is faster than Developer, it is slower than the higher tiers for business-critical incidents.

Trap 2: Enterprise On-Ramp (30-minute response)

Enterprise On-Ramp is a middle-tier support plan offering a 30-minute response time for business-critical system down, which is faster than Business Support's 1-hour but still slower than Enterprise Support's 15-minute response. It is designed for organizations with workloads in early stages but needing faster response than standard Business. Since the question asks for the fastest available response for the most critical scenarios, the 30-minute SLA disqualifies it.

Trap 3: Developer Support (12-hour response)

Developer Support is the lowest-tier paid plan, and for system impaired, it offers a 12-hour response time, which is the slowest among paid plans. For production system down, Developer Support may not even have a specific 1-hour SLA; it typically has 12-hour response for general guidance or impaired systems. It does not include phone support for business-critical incidents and is clearly not the fastest.

A
Business Support (1-hour response)
Why wrong: For production system down, Business Support provides a 1-hour response for the highest severity (production system down) in AWS Support plans. However, it is not the fastest because Enterprise On-Ramp improves to 30 minutes, and Enterprise Support reduces to 15 minutes. So while it is faster than Developer, it is slower than the higher tiers for business-critical incidents.
B
Enterprise On-Ramp (30-minute response)
Why wrong: Enterprise On-Ramp is a middle-tier support plan offering a 30-minute response time for business-critical system down, which is faster than Business Support's 1-hour but still slower than Enterprise Support's 15-minute response. It is designed for organizations with workloads in early stages but needing faster response than standard Business. Since the question asks for the fastest available response for the most critical scenarios, the 30-minute SLA disqualifies it.
C
Enterprise Support (15-minute response)
Enterprise Support provides the fastest response SLA among all AWS Support plans, offering 15-minute response for business-critical system down (highest severity) through a Technical Account Manager and dedicated engineers. This is the best answer because the question likely asks which support plan has the shortest response time for production-critical issues. No other plan matches this 15-minute SLA.
D
Developer Support (12-hour response)
Why wrong: Developer Support is the lowest-tier paid plan, and for system impaired, it offers a 12-hour response time, which is the slowest among paid plans. For production system down, Developer Support may not even have a specific 1-hour SLA; it typically has 12-hour response for general guidance or impaired systems. It does not include phone support for business-critical incidents and is clearly not the fastest.

Question 7mediummultiple choice

A company runs a production workload on Amazon EC2 and Amazon RDS. The operations team needs technical support with a guaranteed response time of less than 1 hour for critical system issues. They also require access to the full set of AWS Trusted Advisor best practice checks, including cost optimization, security, and fault tolerance recommendations. The company does not want to pay for a dedicated Technical Account Manager (TAM). Which AWS Support plan should the company choose?

Trap 1: AWS Basic Support

AWS Basic Support is limited to account and billing assistance, documentation, and community forums, with no technical support for production workloads. It provides no response-time commitment for critical support cases, so the required <1-hour response is impossible to meet. Additionally, Basic Support exposes only a handful of Trusted Advisor core checks (such as service limits and security groups), not the full set of best-practice checks the company needs.

Trap 2: AWS Developer Support

AWS Developer Support offers a response time of <12 hours for critical cases, which does not satisfy the <1 hour requirement. It also provides only limited Trusted Advisor checks (service limits and security groups), not the full set.

Trap 3: AWS Enterprise On-Ramp Support

AWS Enterprise On-Ramp Support offers a 30-minute response for critical cases and full Trusted Advisor, but it includes a Technical Account Manager (TAM) and the associated higher cost. Since the company does not want a TAM, this plan is more than needed and more expensive.

A
AWS Basic Support
Why wrong: AWS Basic Support is limited to account and billing assistance, documentation, and community forums, with no technical support for production workloads. It provides no response-time commitment for critical support cases, so the required <1-hour response is impossible to meet. Additionally, Basic Support exposes only a handful of Trusted Advisor core checks (such as service limits and security groups), not the full set of best-practice checks the company needs.
B
AWS Developer Support
Why wrong: AWS Developer Support offers a response time of <12 hours for critical cases, which does not satisfy the <1 hour requirement. It also provides only limited Trusted Advisor checks (service limits and security groups), not the full set.
C
AWS Business Support
AWS Business Support provides a 1-hour response time for critical cases and includes full access to AWS Trusted Advisor best practice checks. It does not require a dedicated TAM, matching the company's needs without extra cost.
D
AWS Enterprise On-Ramp Support
Why wrong: AWS Enterprise On-Ramp Support offers a 30-minute response for critical cases and full Trusted Advisor, but it includes a Technical Account Manager (TAM) and the associated higher cost. Since the company does not want a TAM, this plan is more than needed and more expensive.

Question 8mediummultiple choice

A company plans to run a fleet of Amazon EC2 instances continuously for 3 years to support a steady-state application. The company wants the lowest possible cost for this predictable workload while maintaining the flexibility to change instance families if needed. Which AWS purchasing option should the company choose?

Trap 1: On-Demand Instances

On-Demand Instances are billed per second or per hour with no upfront commitment or volume discounts, which makes them the most expensive way to run a continuous, 3-year steady-state workload. While they offer total flexibility and no long-term contract, the cumulative cost over three years for a fleet of EC2 instances would be significantly higher than any committed-use pricing model, and they do not provide any cost optimization benefits for predictable, uninterrupted workloads.

Trap 2: Standard Reserved Instances

Standard Reserved Instances provide the largest discount (up to 72%) but require a 1- or 3-year commitment tied to a specific instance family, region, and operating system. This lock-in means that if the company needs to change instance families — for example, to adopt a newer generation or different instance type to meet evolving performance needs — the reserved capacity cannot be flexibly applied, and modifying or exchanging the reservation may not be supported. The lack of flexibility to shift between families is exactly the constraint the company wants to avoid, making Standard Reserved Instances a poor fit despite the deep discount.

Trap 3: Spot Instances

Spot Instances leverage spare AWS EC2 capacity and can offer discounts of up to 90% compared to On-Demand, but they are interruptible with only a two-minute warning before AWS reclaims the capacity. Because the workload in question must run continuously for 3 years without interruption, Spot Instances are unsuitable — a single spot capacity reclamation event would cause downtime or require failover, breaking the steady-state requirement. Their temporary, non-guaranteed nature cannot support a long-term, predictable fleet.

A
On-Demand Instances
Why wrong: On-Demand Instances are billed per second or per hour with no upfront commitment or volume discounts, which makes them the most expensive way to run a continuous, 3-year steady-state workload. While they offer total flexibility and no long-term contract, the cumulative cost over three years for a fleet of EC2 instances would be significantly higher than any committed-use pricing model, and they do not provide any cost optimization benefits for predictable, uninterrupted workloads.
B
Standard Reserved Instances
Why wrong: Standard Reserved Instances provide the largest discount (up to 72%) but require a 1- or 3-year commitment tied to a specific instance family, region, and operating system. This lock-in means that if the company needs to change instance families — for example, to adopt a newer generation or different instance type to meet evolving performance needs — the reserved capacity cannot be flexibly applied, and modifying or exchanging the reservation may not be supported. The lack of flexibility to shift between families is exactly the constraint the company wants to avoid, making Standard Reserved Instances a poor fit despite the deep discount.
C
Compute Savings Plans
Compute Savings Plans provide a flexible pricing model where you commit to a consistent amount of compute usage (measured in dollars per hour) for a 1- or 3-year term, and in return, you receive a discounted rate (up to 66%) that automatically applies across any EC2 instance family, region, or operating system. This flexibility is ideal for a fleet that may need to change instance families over time, making it the lowest-cost option that still allows you to adapt your infrastructure without being locked into a fixed configuration.
D
Spot Instances
Why wrong: Spot Instances leverage spare AWS EC2 capacity and can offer discounts of up to 90% compared to On-Demand, but they are interruptible with only a two-minute warning before AWS reclaims the capacity. Because the workload in question must run continuously for 3 years without interruption, Spot Instances are unsuitable — a single spot capacity reclamation event would cause downtime or require failover, breaking the steady-state requirement. Their temporary, non-guaranteed nature cannot support a long-term, predictable fleet.