New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Anyone use GThost?
Just wondering if anyone here used GThost. I gave their 1 day server a try and I am getting 1-3 mbits outbound to a server I spun up at vultr that is 1 ms away.
I asked their support but they haven't responded so I am wondering if anyone else here has experienced the same thing.
Comments
Network is fast my man.
Yeah I'm thinking there is something wrong, 1-3 mbits is just amazingly low. I googled and couldn't find any reviews on them.
But they offer unmetered 200 mbits, I guess everyone there is abusing it. The strange thing is that inbound is also capped at 200 mbits.
I used this to test transfer speed. No encryption and minimal processing so it should be fast. Interesting thing is that no one here seems to test outbound while its way more important than the inbound cachefly wget tests.
nc -l 1234 > /dev/null
cat /dev/urandom | nc [other server ip here] 1234
Just went through a back and forth with their support. After a while they blamed GTT and sent everything through Cogent. I could reach 200 mbit upload to nearby servers after that.
Anyone know if cogent is reliable enough for a primary outbound carrier?
Depending on your definition of "enough" ...
I'm inclined to say "maybe" ...?
Some hosters trust them enough to use just them exclusively - but I don't get the impression that they're exactly premium - just good enough - and in some cases possibly actually better for certain routes.
What exactly would you have at stake in relying on them? More details might help give a better answer to your question.
Also - please do give more feedback on your experience with GTHost if you stay with them longer. I'm interested to hear how they do for you - would appreciate any more details you're willing to share (such as location)
I want to use it to serve traffic internationally. Ping to locations in the US should be within 5-10ms of the best route, international 10-30 to most places besides difficult to reach places like south africa/brazil/china, packet loss as low as possible.
I've heard some horror stories about cogent here though like peering disputes and bad routing, though not sure how applicable those are now.
I'm testing their Dallas location right now. But I'm not sure I'll be able to make use of it given the low bandwidth even if it is unmetered.
They capped both inbound and outbound to 200 mbits. It isn't burstable at all and inbound being capped is quite strange, so anyone can take the server offline by sending a measly 200 mbits. So it is going to have limited usage for people here running vpses on them.
thanks for the interesting details - hopefully you'll get more good feedback from people with more actual experience.
If you're looking at Dallas, might also check in with DrServer (@radi
) and @HostDoc - I suspect both are on the incero network there (maybe it's just called Hivelocity now). I'm pretty happy with transfers to/from Europe on that network. I suspect it would be relatively good quality for other global destinations as well.some affordable options for dedicated servers there: https://incero.com/autoservers
Naturally, they are likely to restore GTT once the issue is resolved with their port, if any. No one will drop commit like that..
@bob1 have you read this recent thread? -> https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/157959/cogent-or-telia/p1
tl;dr: