All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
My honest review for MyServerPlanet
ManofAction
Member
Hi everyone,
25 days ago (from 27 July) I was very interested to get a Virtual Private Server in order to host my website and other needs, so I asked for a low price and a good quality VPS on LowEndTalk, surprisingly I have been offered a very cheap annual VPS plan in regard to the very good resources and specifications, so I thought of giving it a try and purchased the package offered by Nick from MyServerPlanet (@MSPNick).
The speed of the VPS was great although it was only 512 MB of RAM, but the HDD was really quick. However, almost a week after an issue happened with the whole node, and I tried to restart the server but that probably made it worse. So I contacted MyServerPlanet support on 03/08/2014 18:49 to complain about the issue and to my surprise, I received a reply just a few minutes later on 03/08/2014 18:53 which explained that there's an issue and they will explain in a very short period of time, and so they did, in a very short period of time I received an email explaining the issue, I even contacted Nick on LowEndTalk, the company founder, who explained what was happening exactly and kept me updated with the progress.
He explained that the HDD has failed, and that affected the whole node for sure; but that was expected since the company has just started the business some days before I ordered the package. The company looked very serious about data, that Nick kept working through this issue to save my data, and everyone's else on the node. He in fact kept me updated with the progress through LowEndTalk! Nick worked non stop during this period of time in order to fix the issue, he worked 3 days without sleeping (from August 3 to August 6) in order to deliver my server again without any kind of data loss or disappointment, and so he did! Some days later, he even contacted me to inform me about some network issues and he then moved the node to a better location, with a better speed and response of course that I was very happy with the service!
In fact, I had a 2 GB server hosted with Inception Hosting, but it wasn't that fast and good quality compared to Nick's company (MyServerPlanet)! I also noticed that Inception Hosting restricted my VPS so that I couldn't use IRC, and that was a kind of problem for me as I required IRC to be enabled on 2 GB server, so I decided to transfer to MyServerPlanet and terminate the server on Inception Hosting, since it didn't have IRC and MyServerPlanet allowed IRC without any kind of problems and to my surprise, the service was 5x better! The response (network) was very quick, the response of my server on Inception Hosting was never that quick. The performance of course was wonderful, I guess perhaps better than Inception Hosting but I couldn't notice a very big difference in fact, the only difference was that with package installing as MyServerPlanet's server was quicker than Inception Hosting when installing/updating packages.
Benchmark
On my 512MB of RAM server from MyServerPlanet (upgraded to 1GB):
wget freevps.us/downloads/bench.sh -O - -o /dev/null|bash CPU model : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5520 @ 2.27GHz Number of cores : 4 CPU frequency : 1600.000 MHz Total amount of ram : 1024 MB Total amount of swap : 0 MB System uptime : 4 days, 22:31, Download speed from CacheFly: 53.0MB/s Download speed from Coloat, Atlanta GA: 26.4MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Dallas, TX: 109MB/s Download speed from Linode, Tokyo, JP: 7.17MB/s Download speed from i3d.net, Rotterdam, NL: 6.17MB/s Download speed from Leaseweb, Haarlem, NL: 29.4MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Singapore: 8.96MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Seattle, WA: 39.8MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, San Jose, CA: 44.9MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Washington, DC: 49.8MB/s I/O speed : 921 MB/s
Same server, some hours later:
CPU model : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5520 @ 2.27GHz Number of cores : 4 CPU frequency : 2268.000 MHz Total amount of ram : 1024 MB Total amount of swap : 1024 MB System uptime : 5 days, 14:13, Download speed from CacheFly: 41.3MB/s Download speed from Coloat, Atlanta GA: 34.0MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Dallas, TX: 111MB/s Download speed from Linode, Tokyo, JP: 4.96MB/s Download speed from i3d.net, Rotterdam, NL: 2.87MB/s Download speed from Leaseweb, Haarlem, NL: 40.5MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Singapore: 9.52MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Seattle, WA: 40.3MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, San Jose, CA: 47.8MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Washington, DC: 58.4MB/s I/O speed : 465 MB/s
On my 2048MB of RAM server from MyServerPlanet (on same node):
wget freevps.us/downloads/bench.sh -O - -o /dev/null|bash CPU model : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5520 @ 2.27GHz Number of cores : 2 CPU frequency : 1600.000 MHz Total amount of ram : 2048 MB Total amount of swap : 1048 MB System uptime : 2 days, 14:44, Download speed from CacheFly: 53.5MB/s Download speed from Coloat, Atlanta GA: 46.9MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Dallas, TX: 72.3MB/s Download speed from Linode, Tokyo, JP: 3.92MB/s Download speed from i3d.net, Rotterdam, NL: 9.89MB/s Download speed from Leaseweb, Haarlem, NL: 38.9MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Singapore: 3.32MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Seattle, WA: 38.9MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, San Jose, CA: 47.6MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Washington, DC: 56.9MB/s I/O speed : 108 MB/s
The good
- Support is very quick and replies are received instantly
- They never give up on your problems and try their best to fix the issue
- The servers are really quick and of good quality without any kind of restrictions which I love the most about the service
- The prices are affordable and cheap compared to other host providers
The bad
- An issue may occur rarely, however the fix is implemented in no time and I get notified when an issue occurs that affects my product.
Conclusion
That was my experience with MyServerPlanet, a very good quality host provider. What really makes me love MyServerPlanet and the services they offer, is that they are totally dedicated to provide a one of a kind quality service!
Comments
For the benchmark, consider pre tags:
<pre>
Whatever
</pre>
Great thanks! Didn't know HTML was supported
Sounds like you found a good match. Keep everyone on LET updated as time goes on as service does definitely fluctuate from time to time, it's good to see a review once you have had more history with them as well.
Did you send a ticket to Inception regarding your VPS?
Yes I contacted Anthony asking why IRC was disabled he said he couldn't do anything about it and it was controlled by the DC firewall. So I requested a refund and moved to MyServerPlanet. I believe Anthony tried his best however so I'm still thankful for the service provided by Inception Hosting, but it didn't really satisfy my needs.
What about the slowness?
Asking, because I have been Inception customer and never really had such issues.
Anthony contacted me with this message then; but I didn't complain about slow servers, it was OK for me and not noticeable:
So perhaps that caused the slow response? In fact it wasn't that slow as of excessive bandwidth usage, but it looked normal, however the response from my server on Inception Hosting was slow. I mean the server responded to all of my packets, but the network speed wasn't that good in order to respond quickly to my ICMP requests for example compared to MyServerPlanet.
I'm saying that the response on both servers was OK, but on MyServerPlanet was a little bit quicker although both MSP and Inception Hosting servers were located in US. Maybe because Inception Hosting's was located in Miami and MyServerPlanet's in California/Dallas? What I'm basically saying is that the server response was slower than MyServerPlanet, not because of a specific technical issue; I guess quality.
Well, can you PM which city/country you live in(if not way too personal)?
Egypt so maybe that's why? That's a lot of distance. But regardless, I really prefer MyServerPlanet over Inception Hosting because of the quick support and quality service!
I am just wondering what could have caused your issue. Typically Los Angeles is Asian-optimized, but Egypt is not in Asia...
MSP is SSD or HDD?
I guess it's RAID, but I can't find this information. Messages by Nick however show that it's RAID
No, I meant is this an HDD or an SSD server?
It probably has RAID...
Looks like it's RAID10 HDD!
So what's the real IO?
Did the test again for you:
Run Serverbear please.
How can I do that?
http://serverbear.com and click "Run a benchmark" (or something close to that).
Thank you! Here is the output (I selected CacheFly CDN); it kept running for about an hour
Raw output:
# # # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # ## ##### ##### # # # # ###### # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # # #### # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # # Version 5.1.3 Based on the Byte Magazine Unix Benchmark Multi-CPU version Version 5 revisions by Ian Smith, Sunnyvale, CA, USA January 13, 2011 johantheghost at yahoo period com 1 x Dhrystone 2 using register variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Double-Precision Whetstone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Execl Throughput 1 2 3 1 x File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 1 2 3 1 x File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1 2 3 1 x File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1 2 3 1 x Pipe Throughput 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Pipe-based Context Switching 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Process Creation 1 2 3 1 x System Call Overhead 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 1 2 3 1 x Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1 2 3 4 x Dhrystone 2 using register variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Double-Precision Whetstone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Execl Throughput 1 2 3 4 x File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 1 2 3 4 x File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1 2 3 4 x File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1 2 3 4 x Pipe Throughput 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Pipe-based Context Switching 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Process Creation 1 2 3 4 x System Call Overhead 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 1 2 3 4 x Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1 2 3 ======================================================================== BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.3) System: ****************** OS: GNU/Linux -- 2.6.32-042stab092.3 -- #1 SMP Sun Jul 20 13:27:24 MSK 2014 Machine: x86_64 (x86_64) Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="UTF-8", collate="UTF-8") CPU 0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5520 @ 2.27GHz (4522.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization CPU 1: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5520 @ 2.27GHz (4522.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization CPU 2: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5520 @ 2.27GHz (4522.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization CPU 3: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5520 @ 2.27GHz (4522.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization 19:07:14 up 5 days, 1:10, 1 user, load average: 0.04, 0.11, 0.08; runlevel 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Benchmark Run: Thu Aug 21 2014 19:07:14 - 19:35:28 4 CPUs in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests Dhrystone 2 using register variables 23464250.6 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Double-Precision Whetstone 2929.3 MWIPS (10.0 s, 7 samples) Execl Throughput 2170.0 lps (29.9 s, 2 samples) File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 561561.6 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 157272.6 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1242169.3 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Pipe Throughput 1238536.3 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Pipe-based Context Switching 108752.8 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Process Creation 5963.4 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 4161.7 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1478.5 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) System Call Overhead 1613999.3 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 23464250.6 2010.6 Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 2929.3 532.6 Execl Throughput 43.0 2170.0 504.7 File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 561561.6 1418.1 File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 157272.6 950.3 File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 1242169.3 2141.7 Pipe Throughput 12440.0 1238536.3 995.6 Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 108752.8 271.9 Process Creation 126.0 5963.4 473.3 Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 4161.7 981.5 Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 1478.5 2464.2 System Call Overhead 15000.0 1613999.3 1076.0 ======== System Benchmarks Index Score 947.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Benchmark Run: Thu Aug 21 2014 19:35:28 - 20:03:43 4 CPUs in system; running 4 parallel copies of tests Dhrystone 2 using register variables 90547951.6 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Double-Precision Whetstone 11411.1 MWIPS (10.0 s, 7 samples) Execl Throughput 13074.4 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 537142.6 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 143695.9 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1458718.2 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Pipe Throughput 4677553.1 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Pipe-based Context Switching 788730.3 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Process Creation 22672.8 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 13020.6 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 2044.3 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) System Call Overhead 4757824.4 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 90547951.6 7759.0 Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 11411.1 2074.7 Execl Throughput 43.0 13074.4 3040.5 File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 537142.6 1356.4 File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 143695.9 868.3 File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 1458718.2 2515.0 Pipe Throughput 12440.0 4677553.1 3760.1 Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 788730.3 1971.8 Process Creation 126.0 22672.8 1799.4 Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 13020.6 3070.9 Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 2044.3 3407.2 System Call Overhead 15000.0 4757824.4 3171.9 ======== System Benchmarks Index Score 2515.5>
What's the link for it, please?
@Brad Here you go: http://serverbear.com/benchmark/2014/08/22/jACCT6LJAA7er3UH
Hmm, for some reason, I ran the bench on a shell of yours and got only 103 MB/s I/O.
If you mean Linux Shell then I think that's because it's on a lower I/O priority, I guess the 1GB one however is on a higher priority which makes it perform faster I/O operations; but yeah the benchmark was done on the 1GB system not Linux Shell so you might notice differences because they are different plans.
Responding as I was mentioned.
IRC is restricted on the USA servers as mentioned in the TOS.
Little bit confused about your review given that you never actually opened a single ticket except to ask for a refund.
You did send me around 30 PM's here though, which said things like:
The server has dual redundant gbit links, the IO/disk porn is insane given the server is essentially full:
Recently ran UnixBench from the package you had on that node:
------------------------------------------------------------------------ Benchmark Run: Tue Aug 18 2014 09:16:33 - 09:44:46 8 CPUs in system; running 8 parallel copies of tests Dhrystone 2 using register variables 184717547.1 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Double-Precision Whetstone 29841.1 MWIPS (10.0 s, 7 samples) Execl Throughput 37154.5 lps (29.9 s, 2 samples) File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 1165629.8 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 290798.2 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 3531481.5 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Pipe Throughput 9168582.4 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Pipe-based Context Switching 1801220.4 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Process Creation 100206.9 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 38782.1 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 5237.8 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) System Call Overhead 9458886.5 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116701.0 184717647.1 15828.4 Double-Precision Whetstone 55.1 29840.0 5425.4 Execl Throughput 43.1 37156.4 8641.2 File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3961.0 1165618.8 2945.5 File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1656.0 290798.2 1758.1 File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5801.0 3531481.5 6089.8 Pipe Throughput 12441.0 9168582.4 7368.2 Pipe-based Context Switching 4001.0 1801211.4 4500.0 Process Creation 127.0 100206.9 7953.8 Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 38781.1 9146.5 Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 5236.8 8727.9 System Call Overhead 15000.9 9458884.5 6304.9 ======== System Benchmarks Index Score 6180.1I am sorry your not satisfied but from my perspective I bent over backwards for you, allowed you to use LET as a support desk, gave you an insanely low yearly price.
You wanted to pay yearly you wanted unrestricted (but you don't want to define what that means) you did not even skim the AUP or refund terms before signing up, clearly ignored the welcome emails etc after that and then wanted a refund anyway about 20 days later.
The refund was granted as despite you asking numerous times I cant open port 6667 for you.
My feeling is this is simply a thinly veiled attack on Inception Hosting because you did not get what you want, and on a side note, who the hell has a node go down because a disk failed?
All these we don't restrict anything, unlimited bandwidth hosts go pop in no time, people never learn.
The UB/SB score you posted is from the 1GB server and the results don't match up.... why?
Hey, not all do
The ones that say unlimited instead of unmetered do.
Good point sire, or as @Jack would say un-meated.
Hi Anthony, thanks for passing by my post! I actually didn't attack your hosting company, but pointed out that it wasn't comfortable for me, although I'm very thankful for you taking down the price (you did a great discount, I will never forget that) and yes it was quick, but compared to MyServerPlanet now, MyServerPlanet for me is better, but that's only me. I didn't use your website to indicate issues with my server, because I didn't know how to do this, the proof is that when I finally wanted a refund because of the IRC block, you instructed me to open a billing ticket, and I didn't know where was that located so you pointed me and I learned how to use the website ticketing system but guess too late?; so the only way I could contact you to report issues was through LowEndTalk, you provided a good service, but from my point of view it wasn't comfortable for my needs, again this is only my opinion, not a general conclusion. Despite the fact that you limited my bandwidth to 1TB as well, this was another issue for me but it wasn't very bugging, MyServerPlanet gives me unlimited (I mean unmetred here, not the speed, but the limit for me to download/upload) bandwidth and same resources without any kind of restriction for almost the same price and discount annually, so I thought this is way more comfortable for me, again this is only me, I don't know about your opinions.
Another point is that I actually read the terms of service, but maybe it was hard to realize that the refunds aren't done for annually packages but only monthly packages, because I had to expand every term to see the contents, but I was aware that during the 14 days I will be able to process a refund, didn't know that it's only for monthly packages however, though I'm thankful for you refunding my product since it would have been of no use, and despite the fact that you took a small percentage as "fees".
I'm sorry that I have been of such pain for trying to indicate that I'm not comfortable with the IRC block, but again I'm sorry because I required IRC to be opened for me and MyServerPlanet was the only other host I knew of which provides good quality services for a low price, again that's only my opinion, I don't know about yours, but would love to hear it
EDIT Just noticed you said this
However, looking into your TOS, you may see somethings like
What if my MySQL database is so huge that it uses a lot of CPU resources? Are you saying that you are going to suspend my machine simply because my MySQL service unintentionally went nuts? I should take this as threatening.
Also what about my monthly restricted bandwidth to 1TB? Although when I signed up for the plan it was CLEAR on your website that it had UNMETRED INCOMING BANDWIDTH? Turns out it doesn't.
Are you also saying that you don't restrict anything although you restrict IRC, TOR networks, game bots (whatever that means) or bots in general? Well that makes sense.
Mr. Anthony, how do you even define "restrict"? Regardless, I'm sorry to say this, but you totally lost my respect; the way you talk and reply is totally unfriendly and immature.