Kubernetes Cost Density Calculator

Section 01 — Cluster Profile

Node Count

Namespace Count

vCPU per Node

RAM per Node (GB)

Monthly Node Cost (USD total)

Cluster Platform

Workload Mix

Autoscaler

Section 02 — Utilization & Scheduling Inputs

CPU: Requests vs Actual Utilization

35%

5% = heavily over-requested · 100% = fully utilized

Memory: Requests vs Actual Utilization

40%

Average Pod Density — Current (pods/node)

Node Theoretical Max Pods (kubelet maxPods)

110

Spot vs On-Demand Ratio

0% spot

Active Namespace Ratio (% with running workloads)

60%

Pod Size Distribution

DaemonSet + System Overhead

Anti-Affinity / Topology Constraints

Node Pool Segmentation

Diagnostic Output

Section 03 — Density Analysis Engine

—

Cost Density Score / 100

Unoptimized Partial Governance Operationally Tuned Cost-Dense

— Fragmentation Tax

— Useful Workload Density

— Est. $/Workload-Unit

Dominant Density Limiter —

Metric Breakdown

Weights: Workload Efficiency 30% · Scheduling Density 25% · Node Efficiency 20% · Operational Fragmentation 15% · System Overhead 10%

Section 03B — Visualization Layer

All visualizations are representative models derived from your inputs — not live cluster telemetry.

>_ Synthetic Node Heatmap

Node grid — capacity distribution modeled from inputs

Utilized

Reserved / Unused

Stranded / Fragmented

>_ Pod Packing Grid — Representative Node

Pod slots on one node — gaps show over-request waste and constraint-forced spacing

Scheduled Pod

Empty Slot

Constraint Gap

>_ Utilization vs Reservation

Requested capacity vs actual utilization — the requests-to-actuals gap

Section 04 — Waste Pattern & Architectural Archetype

Architectural Archetype

Section 05 — Industry Benchmark Position

>_ Published Industry Observations

Avg enterprise GPU utilization
CAST AI — 23k clusters, 2026~5%

Typical CPU util vs requests
Datadog Container Report15–20%

Over-provisioned request margin
Datadog Container Report~5–7×

High-density operator range60–75%

>_ Rack2Cloud Density Framework

Unoptimized Scheduling0–25

Partial Density Governance26–50

Operationally Tuned51–75

Cost-Dense Kubernetes76–100

—

Section 06 — Remediation Priorities

Prioritized by structural density impact. Architectural framing only — no savings estimates.

Section 07 — Infrastructure Density Maturity

0–25

Unoptimized Scheduling

26–50

Partial Density Governance

51–75

Operationally Tuned

76–100

Cost-Dense Kubernetes

>_ Density Delta Analysis

Run the analysis, save as baseline, adjust inputs, run again — the Density Delta shows structural improvement between optimization passes.

Cost Architecture Review

The density score names the structural condition. A Cost Architecture Review maps it against your actual cluster configuration, team structure, and workload requirements — and builds the sequenced remediation path.

>_ Request Architecture Review