A media company needs at least 10 TB of storage with maximum possible I/O performance for video processing, 300 TB of very durable storage for media content, and 900 TB for archival media that is not in use. Which set of services should a solutions architect recommend?

The correct option addresses all storage requirements efficiently. Amazon EC2 instance store provides the highest I/O performance for temporary data like video processing, as it's physically attached to the host server. Amazon S3 offers highly durable and scalable object storage suitable for 300 TB of media content that needs frequent access. Amazon S3 Glacier is ideal for cost-effective, long-term archival storage of 900 TB of infrequently accessed data. Amazon EBS, while offering high performance, is not as fast as instance store for temporary, high-I/O workloads. Amazon EFS is a shared file system, not the most cost-effective or performant choice for 300 TB of durable object storage compared to S3. Using S3 for archival storage of 900 TB would be significantly more expensive than S3 Glacier.