A company runs a customer-facing chatbot on Amazon Bedrock with provisioned throughput purchased as a model unit for a specific foundation model in us-east-1. Traffic is steady during business hours but drops to near zero overnight, and the team is paying for the commitment around the clock. Leadership wants to stop paying for idle overnight capacity without risking daytime throttling. Which action best fits?
Provisioned throughput is economically justified when sustained token consumption is high enough that the committed rate beats on-demand pricing and the guaranteed capacity prevents throttling. With near-zero overnight traffic, a 24/7 commitment pays for idle hours. Running on-demand during steady business hours and reserving only when utilization analysis shows a durable break-even point avoids paying for capacity nobody uses.
Why this answer
Provisioned throughput is a monthly commitment that guarantees capacity but bills around the clock, so it only pays off when sustained utilization is high enough to beat on-demand rates. With traffic collapsing overnight, the commitment charges for idle hours. Right-sizing by serving steady load on-demand and reserving only when a utilization analysis shows a durable break-even point removes the idle spend while keeping daytime capacity adequate.
Exam trap
The trap here is assuming provisioned throughput can be paused or resized on a daily cycle, when commitments are term-based and billed regardless of whether tokens flow.