Why contabo VPS/Servers Very Cheap? Looking for Review
New on LowEndTalk? Please read our 'Community Rules' by clicking on it in the right menu!

Why contabo VPS/Servers Very Cheap? Looking for Review

20142014 Member
edited October 8 in Reviews

Why contabo VPS/Servers Very Cheap? Looking for Review

Comments

  • HukinHukin Member

    They need attract buyers to their product by provide better prices and specs than everyone else.

    Thanked by 12014
  • 20142014 Member

    @Hukin said:
    They need attract buyers to their product by provide better prices and specs than everyone else.

    hetzner also ?

  • HukinHukin Member

    2014 said: hetzner also ?

    Yes - Contabo, Hetzner, OVH, Online.net, Vultr, DO, Linode doing that scheme very well

  • gol3mgol3m Member

    They just oversell :) My VPS works really well.

    The cores are not dedicated. The support is A+.

  • @gol3m said:
    They just oversell :) My VPS works really well.

    The cores are not dedicated. The support is A+.

    Do you have SSD or HDD? Not sure what to pick, if it is worthy to go with HDD (comparing prices)

  • LeonDynamicLeonDynamic Member
    edited October 9

    There was a discussion about Contabo a few weeks ago with some benchmarks if that's any help
    https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2879364

    Thanked by 1gol3m
  • gol3mgol3m Member

    @desfire said:

    @gol3m said:
    They just oversell :) My VPS works really well.

    The cores are not dedicated. The support is A+.

    Do you have SSD or HDD? Not sure what to pick, if it is worthy to go with HDD (comparing prices)

    I have HDD and it's just the regular 100 MB/s speed. I hear that if you're unhappy with HDD speed, you can ask to be moved to another node.

  • solairesolaire Member
    edited October 9

    Grabbed a VPS 300 just this morning. I must say I'm impressed for the price I'm paying. Sometimes the network seems to black out, but only if I put a huge load onto it (was rsyncing data from OVH over to Contabo). Doesn't look badly oversold to me, performance is okay, with writes at around 50 MB/s at worst (most of the times it's at 100 MB/s).

    Using it for Nextcloud and some other selfhosted stuff with the 300 GB of storage it comes with, and it's working beautifully for now. Much faster than the KS-1 I was using for this purpose and it's less expensive too.

    Thanked by 1coreflux
  • They oversell but not too much I guess till it impacts performance

  • They had a quite bad reputation a few years ago. I have the impression they've gotten better since then, but I haven't cared enough to find out for sure. Easier to use dedis if you want lots of resources.

    Thanked by 1FlamesRunner
  • Most of them are paid reviews you find in the hostadvice or whatever review site you find.

    I've been investigating them for quite a long time, they seem to oversell much and they provide no refunds even if it's an hour of use and even if you're not satisfied with the performance. Better avoid them.

    Thanked by 1desperand
  • My experience with them, so far, is quite different.

    `----------------------------------------------------------------------
    CPU model : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v3 @ 2.40GHz
    Number of cores : 2
    CPU frequency : 2399.996 MHz
    Total size of Disk : 294.9 GB (95.1 GB Used)
    Total amount of Mem : 3955 MB (1270 MB Used)
    Total amount of Swap : 0 MB (0 MB Used)
    System uptime : 0 days, 23 hour 41 min
    Load average : 0.06, 0.16, 0.17
    OS : Debian GNU/Linux 9
    Arch : x86_64 (64 Bit)

    Kernel : 4.9.0-8-amd64

    I/O speed(1st run) : 97.7 MB/s
    I/O speed(2nd run) : 98.9 MB/s
    I/O speed(3rd run) : 101 MB/s

    Average I/O speed : 99.2 MB/s

    Node Name IPv4 address Download Speed
    CacheFly 205.234.175.175 11.6MB/s
    Linode, Tokyo, JP 106.187.96.148 7.39MB/s
    Linode, Singapore, SG 139.162.23.4 4.92MB/s
    Linode, London, UK 176.58.107.39 11.7MB/s
    Linode, Frankfurt, DE 139.162.130.8 11.8MB/s
    Linode, Fremont, CA 50.116.14.9 7.35MB/s
    Softlayer, Dallas, TX 173.192.68.18 9.54MB/s
    Softlayer, Seattle, WA 67.228.112.250 9.31MB/s
    Softlayer, Frankfurt, DE 159.122.69.4 11.8MB/s
    Softlayer, Singapore, SG 119.81.28.170 7.72MB/s

    Softlayer, HongKong, CN 119.81.130.170 8.74MB/s

    Node Name IPv6 address Download Speed
    Linode, Atlanta, GA 2600:3c02::4b 10.5MB/s
    Linode, Dallas, TX 2600:3c00::4b 4.60MB/s
    Linode, Newark, NJ 2600:3c03::4b 11.0MB/s
    Linode, Singapore, SG 2400:8901::4b 6.58MB/s
    Linode, Tokyo, JP 2400:8900::4b 8.06MB/s
    Softlayer, San Jose, CA 2607:f0d0:2601:2a::4 6.86MB/s
    Softlayer, Washington, WA 2607:f0d0:3001:78::2 5.49MB/s
    Softlayer, Paris, FR 2a03:8180:1301:8::4 10.1MB/s
    Softlayer, Singapore, SG 2401:c900:1101:8::2 6.41MB/s
    Softlayer, Tokyo, JP 2401:c900:1001:16::4 6.59MB/s
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------`

  • @ShihabSoft said:
    Most of them are paid reviews you find in the hostadvice or whatever review site you find.

    I've been investigating them for quite a long time, they seem to oversell much and they provide no refunds even if it's an hour of use and even if you're not satisfied with the performance. Better avoid them.

    Not really. I have been using it myself for some serious purpose and its worth the price. Don't judge them by their past which i also used to do before but then i myself tested the service, it was different. Even suggested few of my friends to buy from them and their experience is also good.

    I agree that they don't refund but its mentioned in their terms, one wouldn't mind paying few euros for a single month.

    Support is also good and responsive, had few problems in beginning but they all sorted it up for me.

  • @Lampard said:

    @ShihabSoft said:
    Most of them are paid reviews you find in the hostadvice or whatever review site you find.

    I've been investigating them for quite a long time, they seem to oversell much and they provide no refunds even if it's an hour of use and even if you're not satisfied with the performance. Better avoid them.

    Not really. I have been using it myself for some serious purpose and its worth the price. Don't judge them by their past which i also used to do before but then i myself tested the service, it was different. Even suggested few of my friends to buy from them and their experience is also good.

    I agree that they don't refund but its mentioned in their terms, one wouldn't mind paying few euros for a single month.

    Support is also good and responsive, had few problems in beginning but they all sorted it up for me.

    @solaire said:
    My experience with them, so far, is quite different.

    `----------------------------------------------------------------------
    CPU model : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v3 @ 2.40GHz
    Number of cores : 2
    CPU frequency : 2399.996 MHz
    Total size of Disk : 294.9 GB (95.1 GB Used)
    Total amount of Mem : 3955 MB (1270 MB Used)
    Total amount of Swap : 0 MB (0 MB Used)
    System uptime : 0 days, 23 hour 41 min
    Load average : 0.06, 0.16, 0.17
    OS : Debian GNU/Linux 9
    Arch : x86_64 (64 Bit)

    Kernel : 4.9.0-8-amd64

    I/O speed(1st run) : 97.7 MB/s
    I/O speed(2nd run) : 98.9 MB/s
    I/O speed(3rd run) : 101 MB/s

    Average I/O speed : 99.2 MB/s

    Node Name IPv4 address Download Speed
    CacheFly 205.234.175.175 11.6MB/s
    Linode, Tokyo, JP 106.187.96.148 7.39MB/s
    Linode, Singapore, SG 139.162.23.4 4.92MB/s
    Linode, London, UK 176.58.107.39 11.7MB/s
    Linode, Frankfurt, DE 139.162.130.8 11.8MB/s
    Linode, Fremont, CA 50.116.14.9 7.35MB/s
    Softlayer, Dallas, TX 173.192.68.18 9.54MB/s
    Softlayer, Seattle, WA 67.228.112.250 9.31MB/s
    Softlayer, Frankfurt, DE 159.122.69.4 11.8MB/s
    Softlayer, Singapore, SG 119.81.28.170 7.72MB/s

    Softlayer, HongKong, CN 119.81.130.170 8.74MB/s

    Node Name IPv6 address Download Speed
    Linode, Atlanta, GA 2600:3c02::4b 10.5MB/s
    Linode, Dallas, TX 2600:3c00::4b 4.60MB/s
    Linode, Newark, NJ 2600:3c03::4b 11.0MB/s
    Linode, Singapore, SG 2400:8901::4b 6.58MB/s
    Linode, Tokyo, JP 2400:8900::4b 8.06MB/s
    Softlayer, San Jose, CA 2607:f0d0:2601:2a::4 6.86MB/s
    Softlayer, Washington, WA 2607:f0d0:3001:78::2 5.49MB/s
    Softlayer, Paris, FR 2a03:8180:1301:8::4 10.1MB/s
    Softlayer, Singapore, SG 2401:c900:1101:8::2 6.41MB/s
    Softlayer, Tokyo, JP 2401:c900:1001:16::4 6.59MB/s
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------`

    Could anyone do a geekbench benchmark and nench.sh too?

    I am so intrigued to see their current performance.

    As they usually offer higher ram speeds on the cheapest offers, I'd also love to see the ram speed.

    sysbench --test=memory --memory-block-size=1M --memory-block-size=8G

    Thanks.

  • @ShihabSoft said:
    Could anyone do a geekbench benchmark and nench.sh too?

    I am so intrigued to see their current performance.

    As they usually offer higher ram speeds on the cheapest offers, I'd also love to see the ram speed.

    sysbench --test=memory --memory-block-size=1M --memory-block-size=8G

    Thanks.

    Sure, here you go. I can run another benchmark if you want, just point me to it. As it's not a production system I don't really mind running them.

    [email protected]:/home# sysbench --test=memory --memory-block-size=1M --memory-block-size=2G run
    sysbench 0.4.12:  multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark
    
    Running the test with following options:
    Number of threads: 1
    
    Doing memory operations speed test
    Memory block size: 2097152K
    
    Memory transfer size: 102400M
    
    Memory operations type: write
    Memory scope type: global
    Threads started!
    Done.
    
    Operations performed: 50 (    2.16 ops/sec)
    
    102400.00 MB transferred (4433.82 MB/sec)
    
    
    Test execution summary:
        total time:                          23.0952s
        total number of events:              50
        total time taken by event execution: 23.0939
        per-request statistics:
             min:                                308.61ms
             avg:                                461.88ms
             max:                                929.44ms
             approx.  95 percentile:             814.10ms
    
    Threads fairness:
        events (avg/stddev):           50.0000/0.00
        execution time (avg/stddev):   23.0939/0.00
    
  • gol3mgol3m Member
    [email protected]:~# sysbench --test=memory --memory-block-size=1M --memory-block-size=8G run
    WARNING: the --test option is deprecated. You can pass a script name or path on the command line without any options.
    sysbench 1.0.11 (using system LuaJIT 2.1.0-beta3)
    
    Running the test with following options:
    Number of threads: 1
    Initializing random number generator from current time
    
    
    Running memory speed test with the following options:
      block size: 8388608KiB
      total size: 102400MiB
      operation: write
      scope: global
    
    Initializing worker threads...
    
    Threads started!
    
    Total operations: 7 (    0.64 per second)
    
    57344.00 MiB transferred (5252.93 MiB/sec)
    
    
    General statistics:
        total time:                          10.8870s
        total number of events:              7
    
    Latency (ms):
             min:                               1389.51
             avg:                               1555.04
             max:                               2418.06
             95th percentile:                   2405.65
             sum:                              10885.26
    
    Threads fairness:
        events (avg/stddev):           7.0000/0.00
        execution time (avg/stddev):   10.8853/0.00
    
  • @ShihabSoft said:

    @Lampard said:

    @ShihabSoft said:
    Most of them are paid reviews you find in the hostadvice or whatever review site you find.

    I've been investigating them for quite a long time, they seem to oversell much and they provide no refunds even if it's an hour of use and even if you're not satisfied with the performance. Better avoid them.

    Not really. I have been using it myself for some serious purpose and its worth the price. Don't judge them by their past which i also used to do before but then i myself tested the service, it was different. Even suggested few of my friends to buy from them and their experience is also good.

    I agree that they don't refund but its mentioned in their terms, one wouldn't mind paying few euros for a single month.

    Support is also good and responsive, had few problems in beginning but they all sorted it up for me.

    @solaire said:
    My experience with them, so far, is quite different.

    `----------------------------------------------------------------------
    CPU model : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v3 @ 2.40GHz
    Number of cores : 2
    CPU frequency : 2399.996 MHz
    Total size of Disk : 294.9 GB (95.1 GB Used)
    Total amount of Mem : 3955 MB (1270 MB Used)
    Total amount of Swap : 0 MB (0 MB Used)
    System uptime : 0 days, 23 hour 41 min
    Load average : 0.06, 0.16, 0.17
    OS : Debian GNU/Linux 9
    Arch : x86_64 (64 Bit)

    Kernel : 4.9.0-8-amd64

    I/O speed(1st run) : 97.7 MB/s
    I/O speed(2nd run) : 98.9 MB/s
    I/O speed(3rd run) : 101 MB/s

    Average I/O speed : 99.2 MB/s

    Node Name IPv4 address Download Speed
    CacheFly 205.234.175.175 11.6MB/s
    Linode, Tokyo, JP 106.187.96.148 7.39MB/s
    Linode, Singapore, SG 139.162.23.4 4.92MB/s
    Linode, London, UK 176.58.107.39 11.7MB/s
    Linode, Frankfurt, DE 139.162.130.8 11.8MB/s
    Linode, Fremont, CA 50.116.14.9 7.35MB/s
    Softlayer, Dallas, TX 173.192.68.18 9.54MB/s
    Softlayer, Seattle, WA 67.228.112.250 9.31MB/s
    Softlayer, Frankfurt, DE 159.122.69.4 11.8MB/s
    Softlayer, Singapore, SG 119.81.28.170 7.72MB/s

    Softlayer, HongKong, CN 119.81.130.170 8.74MB/s

    Node Name IPv6 address Download Speed
    Linode, Atlanta, GA 2600:3c02::4b 10.5MB/s
    Linode, Dallas, TX 2600:3c00::4b 4.60MB/s
    Linode, Newark, NJ 2600:3c03::4b 11.0MB/s
    Linode, Singapore, SG 2400:8901::4b 6.58MB/s
    Linode, Tokyo, JP 2400:8900::4b 8.06MB/s
    Softlayer, San Jose, CA 2607:f0d0:2601:2a::4 6.86MB/s
    Softlayer, Washington, WA 2607:f0d0:3001:78::2 5.49MB/s
    Softlayer, Paris, FR 2a03:8180:1301:8::4 10.1MB/s
    Softlayer, Singapore, SG 2401:c900:1101:8::2 6.41MB/s
    Softlayer, Tokyo, JP 2401:c900:1001:16::4 6.59MB/s
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------`

    Could anyone do a geekbench benchmark and nench.sh too?

    I am so intrigued to see their current performance.

    https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2881318/#Comment_2881318

    I did some benchmarks a while back and this is with the cheapest SDD one.

  • @solaire said:

    @ShihabSoft said:
    Could anyone do a geekbench benchmark and nench.sh too?

    I am so intrigued to see their current performance.

    As they usually offer higher ram speeds on the cheapest offers, I'd also love to see the ram speed.

    sysbench --test=memory --memory-block-size=1M --memory-block-size=8G

    Thanks.

    Sure, here you go. I can run another benchmark if you want, just point me to it. As it's not a production system I don't really mind running them.

    [email protected]:/home# sysbench --test=memory --memory-block-size=1M --memory-block-size=2G run
    sysbench 0.4.12:  multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark
    
    Running the test with following options:
    Number of threads: 1
    
    Doing memory operations speed test
    Memory block size: 2097152K
    
    Memory transfer size: 102400M
    
    Memory operations type: write
    Memory scope type: global
    Threads started!
    Done.
    
    Operations performed: 50 (    2.16 ops/sec)
    
    102400.00 MB transferred (4433.82 MB/sec)
    
    
    Test execution summary:
        total time:                          23.0952s
        total number of events:              50
        total time taken by event execution: 23.0939
        per-request statistics:
             min:                                308.61ms
             avg:                                461.88ms
             max:                                929.44ms
             approx.  95 percentile:             814.10ms
    
    Threads fairness:
        events (avg/stddev):           50.0000/0.00
        execution time (avg/stddev):   23.0939/0.00
    

    @gol3m said:
    [email protected]:~# sysbench --test=memory --memory-block-size=1M --memory-block-size=8G run
    WARNING: the --test option is deprecated. You can pass a script name or path on the command line without any options.
    sysbench 1.0.11 (using system LuaJIT 2.1.0-beta3)

    Running the test with following options:
    Number of threads: 1
    Initializing random number generator from current time


    Running memory speed test with the following options:
    block size: 8388608KiB
    total size: 102400MiB
    operation: write
    scope: global

    Initializing worker threads...

    Threads started!

    Total operations: 7 ( 0.64 per second)

    57344.00 MiB transferred (5252.93 MiB/sec)


    General statistics:
    total time: 10.8870s
    total number of events: 7

    Latency (ms):
    min: 1389.51
    avg: 1555.04
    max: 2418.06
    95th percentile: 2405.65
    sum: 10885.26

    Threads fairness:
    events (avg/stddev): 7.0000/0.00
    execution time (avg/stddev): 10.8853/0.00

    Thanks guys.

    Looks like the ram speed is capped or a DDR 3 one, maybe it's usual as it is.

    Btw, please do these benchmarks too

    (curl -s wget.racing/nench.sh | bash; curl -s wget.racing/nench.sh | bash) 2>&1 | tee nench.log

    And Geekbench

    wget http://cdn.geekbench.com/Geekbench-4.3.0-Linux.tar.gz
    tar -xzvf Geekbench-4.3.0-Linux.tar.gz
    cd Geekbench-4.3.0-Linux
    ./geekbench_x86_64
    
  • @ShihabSoft said:
    Thanks guys.

    Looks like the ram speed is capped or a DDR 3 one, maybe it's usual as it is.

    Btw, please do these benchmarks too

    (curl -s wget.racing/nench.sh | bash; curl -s wget.racing/nench.sh | bash) 2>&1 | tee nench.log

    And Geekbench

    wget http://cdn.geekbench.com/Geekbench-4.3.0-Linux.tar.gz
    tar -xzvf Geekbench-4.3.0-Linux.tar.gz
    cd Geekbench-4.3.0-Linux
    ./geekbench_x86_64
    

    I'm honestly not sure. Experiences between HDD and SSD plans may differ, as I'm on HDD.

    -------------------------------------------------
     nench.sh v2018.04.14 -- https://git.io/nench.sh
     benchmark timestamp:    2018-10-11 10:16:16 UTC
    -------------------------------------------------
    
    Processor:    Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v3 @ 2.40GHz
    CPU cores:    2
    Frequency:    2399.996 MHz
    RAM:          3.9G
    Swap:         -
    Kernel:       Linux 4.9.0-8-amd64 x86_64
    
    Disks:
    sda    300G  HDD
    
    CPU: SHA256-hashing 500 MB
        3.977 seconds
    CPU: bzip2-compressing 500 MB
        6.337 seconds
    CPU: AES-encrypting 500 MB
        1.742 seconds
    
    ioping: seek rate
        min/avg/max/mdev = 35.2 us / 73.7 us / 183.2 ms / 848.8 us
    ioping: sequential read speed
        generated 10.3 k requests in 5.00 s, 2.52 GiB, 2.06 k iops, 516.1 MiB/s
    
    dd: sequential write speed
        1st run:    116.35 MiB/s
        2nd run:    107.77 MiB/s
        3rd run:    102.04 MiB/s
        average:    108.72 MiB/s
    
    IPv4 speedtests
        your IPv4:    xx.xx.xx.xxxx
    
        Cachefly CDN:         11.51 MiB/s
        Leaseweb (NL):        11.63 MiB/s
        Softlayer DAL (US):   7.69 MiB/s
        Online.net (FR):      10.69 MiB/s
        OVH BHS (CA):         7.41 MiB/s
    
    IPv6 speedtests
        your IPv6:    xx:xx:xx:xxxx
    
        Leaseweb (NL):        11.39 MiB/s
        Softlayer DAL (US):   9.07 MiB/s
        Online.net (FR):      10.96 MiB/s
        OVH BHS (CA):         9.50 MiB/s
    -------------------------------------------------
    

    https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/10296542

    Thanked by 1ShihabSoft
  • @solaire said:

    @ShihabSoft said:
    Thanks guys.

    Looks like the ram speed is capped or a DDR 3 one, maybe it's usual as it is.

    Btw, please do these benchmarks too

    (curl -s wget.racing/nench.sh | bash; curl -s wget.racing/nench.sh | bash) 2>&1 | tee nench.log

    And Geekbench

    wget http://cdn.geekbench.com/Geekbench-4.3.0-Linux.tar.gz
    tar -xzvf Geekbench-4.3.0-Linux.tar.gz
    cd Geekbench-4.3.0-Linux
    ./geekbench_x86_64
    

    I'm honestly not sure. Experiences between HDD and SSD plans may differ, as I'm on HDD.

    -------------------------------------------------
     nench.sh v2018.04.14 -- https://git.io/nench.sh
     benchmark timestamp:    2018-10-11 10:16:16 UTC
    -------------------------------------------------
    
    Processor:    Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v3 @ 2.40GHz
    CPU cores:    2
    Frequency:    2399.996 MHz
    RAM:          3.9G
    Swap:         -
    Kernel:       Linux 4.9.0-8-amd64 x86_64
    
    Disks:
    sda    300G  HDD
    
    CPU: SHA256-hashing 500 MB
        3.977 seconds
    CPU: bzip2-compressing 500 MB
        6.337 seconds
    CPU: AES-encrypting 500 MB
        1.742 seconds
    
    ioping: seek rate
        min/avg/max/mdev = 35.2 us / 73.7 us / 183.2 ms / 848.8 us
    ioping: sequential read speed
        generated 10.3 k requests in 5.00 s, 2.52 GiB, 2.06 k iops, 516.1 MiB/s
    
    dd: sequential write speed
        1st run:    116.35 MiB/s
        2nd run:    107.77 MiB/s
        3rd run:    102.04 MiB/s
        average:    108.72 MiB/s
    
    IPv4 speedtests
        your IPv4:    xx.xx.xx.xxxx
    
        Cachefly CDN:         11.51 MiB/s
        Leaseweb (NL):        11.63 MiB/s
        Softlayer DAL (US):   7.69 MiB/s
        Online.net (FR):      10.69 MiB/s
        OVH BHS (CA):         7.41 MiB/s
    
    IPv6 speedtests
        your IPv6:    xx:xx:xx:xxxx
    
        Leaseweb (NL):        11.39 MiB/s
        Softlayer DAL (US):   9.07 MiB/s
        Online.net (FR):      10.96 MiB/s
        OVH BHS (CA):         9.50 MiB/s
    -------------------------------------------------
    

    https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/10296542

    Thanks for that. What was your plan tho? For an HDD those speeds are pretty good. But the processing speed is little bit on the downside. So you're on a 100 Mbits plan?

  • solairesolaire Member
    edited October 11

    @ShihabSoft said:

    Thanks for that. What was your plan tho? For an HDD those speeds are pretty good. But the processing speed is little bit on the downside. So you're on a 100 Mbits plan?

    You're most welcome. I'm on the VPS300 plan, the 3.99 euro one as listed here on the left: https://contabo.com/?show=vps.

    It comes with 100 Mbit, ssd plans come with 200 or more. The top HDD plan comes with 1000 Mbit.

  • LvivLviv Member
    edited October 12

    VPS S SSD 4.99 EUR / month

    -------------------------------------------------
     nench.sh v2018.04.14 -- https://git.io/nench.sh
     benchmark timestamp:    2018-10-12 05:24:58 UTC
    -------------------------------------------------
    
    Processor:    Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2630 v4 @ 2.20GHz
    CPU cores:    4
    Frequency:    2199.996 MHz
    RAM:          7.6G
    Swap:         -
    Kernel:       Linux 3.10.0-862.el7.x86_64 x86_64
    
    Disks:
    sda    200G  HDD
    
    CPU: SHA256-hashing 500 MB
        2.342 seconds
    CPU: bzip2-compressing 500 MB
        CPU: AES-encrypting 500 MB
        2.026 seconds
    
    ioping: seek rate
        min/avg/max/mdev = 33.4 us / 86.0 us / 11.7 ms / 156.4 us
    ioping: sequential read speed
        generated 22.5 k requests in 5.00 s, 5.50 GiB, 4.50 k iops, 1.10 GiB/s
    
    dd: sequential write speed
        1st run:    90.41 MiB/s
        2nd run:    89.93 MiB/s
        3rd run:    88.98 MiB/s
        average:    89.77 MiB/s
    
    IPv4 speedtests
        your IPv4:    xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
    
        Cachefly CDN:         23.03 MiB/s
        Leaseweb (NL):        22.33 MiB/s
        Softlayer DAL (US):   13.45 MiB/s
        Online.net (FR):      15.76 MiB/s
        OVH BHS (CA):         11.68 MiB/s
    
    IPv6 speedtests
        your IPv6:    xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx
    
        Leaseweb (NL):        21.96 MiB/s
        Softlayer DAL (US):   14.43 MiB/s
        Online.net (FR):      21.70 MiB/s
        OVH BHS (CA):         0.00 MiB/s
    -------------------------------------------------
    
    -------------------------------------------------
     nench.sh v2018.04.14 -- https://git.io/nench.sh
     benchmark timestamp:    2018-10-12 05:26:47 UTC
    -------------------------------------------------
    
    Processor:    Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2630 v4 @ 2.20GHz
    CPU cores:    4
    Frequency:    2199.996 MHz
    RAM:          7.6G
    Swap:         -
    Kernel:       Linux 3.10.0-862.el7.x86_64 x86_64
    
    Disks:
    sda    200G  HDD
    
    CPU: SHA256-hashing 500 MB
        2.390 seconds
    CPU: bzip2-compressing 500 MB
        CPU: AES-encrypting 500 MB
        1.956 seconds
    
    ioping: seek rate
        min/avg/max/mdev = 41.1 us / 98.3 us / 15.6 ms / 197.2 us
    ioping: sequential read speed
        generated 23.0 k requests in 5.00 s, 5.61 GiB, 4.59 k iops, 1.12 GiB/s
    
    dd: sequential write speed
        1st run:    77.53 MiB/s
        2nd run:    93.65 MiB/s
        3rd run:    89.45 MiB/s
        average:    86.88 MiB/s
    
    IPv4 speedtests
        your IPv4:    xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
    
        Cachefly CDN:         22.93 MiB/s
        Leaseweb (NL):        22.53 MiB/s
        Softlayer DAL (US):   15.06 MiB/s
        Online.net (FR):      14.33 MiB/s
        OVH BHS (CA):         17.17 MiB/s
    
    IPv6 speedtests
        your IPv6:    xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
    
        Leaseweb (NL):        22.14 MiB/s
        Softlayer DAL (US):   13.74 MiB/s
        Online.net (FR):      21.13 MiB/s
        OVH BHS (CA):         9.68 MiB/s
    
    Thanked by 1solaire
  • LvivLviv Member
    edited October 12

    second test after sequential write speed fix, you have to email support

    -------------------------------------------------
     nench.sh v2018.04.14 -- https://git.io/nench.sh
     benchmark timestamp:    2018-10-12 07:33:05 UTC
    -------------------------------------------------
    
    Processor:    Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2630 v4 @ 2.20GHz
    CPU cores:    4
    Frequency:    2199.996 MHz
    RAM:          7.6G
    Swap:         -
    Kernel:       Linux 3.10.0-862.el7.x86_64 x86_64
    
    Disks:
    sda    200G  HDD
    
    CPU: SHA256-hashing 500 MB
        2.493 seconds
    CPU: bzip2-compressing 500 MB
        CPU: AES-encrypting 500 MB
        1.928 seconds
    
    ioping: seek rate
        min/avg/max/mdev = 40.3 us / 95.6 us / 9.35 ms / 174.4 us
    ioping: sequential read speed
        generated 25.1 k requests in 5.00 s, 6.12 GiB, 5.01 k iops, 1.22 GiB/s
    
    dd: sequential write speed
        1st run:    258.45 MiB/s
        2nd run:    267.03 MiB/s
        3rd run:    268.94 MiB/s
        average:    264.80 MiB/s
    
    IPv4 speedtests
        your IPv4:    xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
    
        Cachefly CDN:         23.02 MiB/s
        Leaseweb (NL):        22.59 MiB/s
        Softlayer DAL (US):   12.42 MiB/s
        Online.net (FR):      20.04 MiB/s
        OVH BHS (CA):         8.29 MiB/s
    
    IPv6 speedtests
        your IPv6:    xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
    
        Leaseweb (NL):        22.02 MiB/s
        Softlayer DAL (US):   14.72 MiB/s
        Online.net (FR):      18.78 MiB/s
        OVH BHS (CA):         10.67 MiB/s
    -------------------------------------------------
    
    -------------------------------------------------
     nench.sh v2018.04.14 -- https://git.io/nench.sh
     benchmark timestamp:    2018-10-12 07:34:32 UTC
    -------------------------------------------------
    
    Processor:    Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2630 v4 @ 2.20GHz
    CPU cores:    4
    Frequency:    2199.996 MHz
    RAM:          7.6G
    Swap:         -
    Kernel:       Linux 3.10.0-862.el7.x86_64 x86_64
    
    Disks:
    sda    200G  HDD
    
    CPU: SHA256-hashing 500 MB
        2.576 seconds
    CPU: bzip2-compressing 500 MB
        CPU: AES-encrypting 500 MB
        1.847 seconds
    
    ioping: seek rate
        min/avg/max/mdev = 34.8 us / 76.2 us / 32.9 ms / 179.5 us
    ioping: sequential read speed
        generated 26.6 k requests in 5.00 s, 6.49 GiB, 5.32 k iops, 1.30 GiB/s
    
    dd: sequential write speed
        1st run:    307.08 MiB/s
        2nd run:    263.21 MiB/s
        3rd run:    263.21 MiB/s
        average:    277.84 MiB/s
    
    IPv4 speedtests
        your IPv4:    xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
    
        Cachefly CDN:         22.16 MiB/s
        Leaseweb (NL):        22.36 MiB/s
        Softlayer DAL (US):   11.98 MiB/s
        Online.net (FR):      16.24 MiB/s
        OVH BHS (CA):         6.03 MiB/s
    
    IPv6 speedtests
        your IPv6:    xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
    
        Leaseweb (NL):        22.05 MiB/s
        Softlayer DAL (US):   14.84 MiB/s
        Online.net (FR):      13.83 MiB/s
        OVH BHS (CA):         0.00 MiB/s
    -------------------------------------------------
    
    Thanked by 1solaire
  • Just ordered a HDD one, hopefully it is worth the price, I was about to buy the SSD one but wanted to save the money.

    How much do they take to deliver it? most companies do it automatically.

  • @desfire said:
    Just ordered a HDD one, hopefully it is worth the price, I was about to buy the SSD one but wanted to save the money.

    How much do they take to deliver it? most companies do it automatically.

    If you buy for the first time, you must send your ID, After verification, they will activate the VPS server, each new order will be delivered much faster. I got servers within 1 hour. I was very pleased with them ..

  • LvivLviv Member

    @Robert012 said:
    If you buy for the first time, you must send your ID, After verification, they will activate the VPS server

    i'm new and they didn't ask me for ID

  • gol3mgol3m Member

    @Robert012 said:

    @desfire said:
    Just ordered a HDD one, hopefully it is worth the price, I was about to buy the SSD one but wanted to save the money.

    How much do they take to deliver it? most companies do it automatically.

    If you buy for the first time, you must send your ID, After verification, they will activate the VPS server, each new order will be delivered much faster. I got servers within 1 hour. I was very pleased with them ..

    I did not have to show my ID. Setup took 1 day (weekend).

    Cancel the VPS right away (cancellation period). If you want to keep it, un-cancel it.

  • Got mine:

    [[email protected] ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 7.52704 s, 143 MB/s
    [[email protected]~]# wget freevps.us/downloads/bench.sh -O - -o /dev/null|bash
    Benchmark started on Sat Oct 13 13:45:40 CEST 2018
    Full benchmark log: /root/bench.log
    System Info

    Processor : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v3 @ 2.40GHz
    CPU Cores : 6
    Frequency : 2399.998 MHz
    Memory : 19916 MB
    Swap : MB
    Uptime : 1:14,

    OS : \S
    Arch : x86_64 (64 Bit)
    Kernel : 3.10.0-862.el7.x86_64
    Hostname : pluto.host4fans.net
    Speedtest (IPv4 only)

    Your public IPv4 is 207.180.218.195

    Location Provider Speed
    CDN Cachefly 46.1MB/s

    Atlanta, GA, US Coloat 1.33MB/s
    Dallas, TX, US Softlayer 7.92MB/s
    Seattle, WA, US Softlayer 7.09MB/s
    San Jose, CA, US Softlayer 9.85MB/s
    Washington, DC, US Softlayer 13.0MB/s

    Tokyo, Japan Linode 2.63MB/s
    Singapore Softlayer 5.63MB/s

    Rotterdam, Netherlands id3.net 16.6MB/s
    Haarlem, Netherlands Leaseweb 19.7MB/s
    Disk Speed

    I/O (1st run) : 112 MB/s
    I/O (2nd run) : 107 MB/s
    I/O (3rd run) : 108 MB/s
    Average I/O : 109 MB/s

  • Hello everyone, I am from China and want to buy this VPS, but I do not know how fast the visit is in China. Is there any good Samaritan who can provide a website link for me to test? Thank you

  • TBH the VPS quality and the support quality is really good, however, there is something I am not seeing right, about 10-11 times a day my load averages goes from 1-2 to 10-16 making my sites unreacheable, I logged the VPS and it goes not because of me but some neighbor.. anyone with the same issue?

    Already reported, they tried to fix it twice but their latest reply was that I need to understand that I am on a VPS and not a Dedicated.. yeah I get that but those load averages.. it literally goes from a little bit more of 1.0 to 10 or 16.0

  • @desfire said:
    Already reported, they tried to fix it twice but their latest reply was that I need to understand that I am on a VPS and not a Dedicated.. yeah I get that but those load averages.. it literally goes from a little bit more of 1.0 to 10 or 16.0

    The various intel CPU bugs have a nasty bit of kernel switching for certain tasks. Starting up and networking tend to artifically inflate the spin.

  • CyberMonday said: The various intel CPU bugs have a nasty bit of kernel switching for certain tasks. Starting up and networking tend to artifically inflate the spin.

    Is there a way ro fix it?

  • @desfire said:

    CyberMonday said: The various intel CPU bugs have a nasty bit of kernel switching for certain tasks. Starting up and networking tend to artifically inflate the spin.

    Is there a way ro fix it?

    Run your own hardware in a way you don't need to patch around the design.

  • gol3mgol3m Member

    I just observed 1.0 load on my idle/fresh 6 core VPS. Logging in over SSH was sluggish. It quickly went back to 0.

    @CyberMonday are you sure it's not just CPU overselling?

    @desfire have they tried putting you on another node? How many cores does your plan have?

    With Hetzner servers having become unmetered, I am probably going to go with them for fully dedicated resources. Their auction server even has slightly better value, leaving aside RAM.

  • @gol3m Yes.

    Thanked by 1gol3m
  • @desfire said:
    TBH the VPS quality and the support quality is really good, however, there is something I am not seeing right, about 10-11 times a day my load averages goes from 1-2 to 10-16 making my sites unreacheable, I logged the VPS and it goes not because of me but some neighbor.. anyone with the same issue?

    Already reported, they tried to fix it twice but their latest reply was that I need to understand that I am on a VPS and not a Dedicated.. yeah I get that but those load averages.. it literally goes from a little bit more of 1.0 to 10 or 16.0

    Yes, I had the same issue, after contacting support, first they changed something and i ended up with high load + this issue.

    kernel:NMI watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 25s! [kworker/0:0:27669]

    After reporting again, they finally fixed it. Not sure what they did but i dont have high load issues anymore. its been 5-6 days (i used to have high load issue almost everyday around the same time)

Sign In or Register to comment.