Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Na na Na na Batmania! Hanging from Down and under. Some Koality stuff inside - Page 2
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.

Na na Na na Batmania! Hanging from Down and under. Some Koality stuff inside

2»

Comments

  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker

    Some of you might have taken my post above as fanboy shilling - if so you were dead wrong. And here's the data to prove it.
    Why did I wait a bit? Because I wanted (a) a reasonable amount of results sets, and (b) at the beginning I was (almost) alone on the node but by now I guess the node is (at least almost) full and I wanted those real world numbers.

    The model I benchmarked is the '4G'.

    Version 2.1.0a, (c) 2018+ jsg (->lowendtalk.com)
    Machine: amd64, Arch.: amd64, Model: AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 12-Core Processor            
    OS, version: FreeBSD 13.0, Mem.: 3.990 GB
    CPU - Cores: 4, Family/Model/Stepping: 23/113/0
    Cache: 32K/32K L1d/L1i, 512K L2, 64M L3
    Std. Flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat
              pse36 cflsh mmx fxsr sse sse2 sse3 pclmulqdq ssse3 fma cx16 sse4_1
              sse4_2 popcnt aes xsave osxsave avx f16c rdrnd hypervisor
    Ext. Flags: fsgsbase bmi1 avx2 smep bmi2 syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb
              rdtscp lm lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm cr8_legacy lzcnt sse4a misalignsse
              3dnowprefetch osvw
    
    ProcMem SC [MB/s]: avg 460.1 - min 439.7 (95.6 %), max 481.9 (104.7 %)
    ProcMem MA [MB/s]: avg 1067.8 - min 901.8 (84.5 %), max 1240.0 (116.1 %)
    ProcMem MB [MB/s]: avg 1148.8 - min 945.3 (82.3 %), max 1320.0 (114.9 %)
    

    First a remark re vpsbench itself or more precisely the versions. Since quite a while v. 2.1.0 or 2.1.0.a are used for all my benchmarks and maybe you'll see a v.2.2.0a occasionally. Don't worry, the tests run (and the code) is always the same. v. 2.1.0.a just has a minor change over v. 2.1.0 but not related to the benchmarking core. And 2.2.0[a] is 2.1.0a but with changes for a Windows version (tested with 8.1 and higher) I created for a LET user who had asked me politely and friendly (I didn't have a Windows version in my eyes originally because hell, wo would run VMs on Windows?)

    Now to the beast - and I think you'll agree to calling it 'beast'. 460 single core! four-hundred-sixty! nd of course you'll have AES and other nice flags (like e.g. 'popcnt' or 'hypervisor').
    The single-core spread is really nice and tight and the multi-core spread is decent too. Nice! The only point I like less is that the multi-core gain is relatively low (about 2.5-ish) but that's just Ryzen.

    --- Disk - Buffered ---
    Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 2761.37 - min 2254.39 (81.6%), max 3288.82 (119.1%)
    Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 8438.66 - min 7293.08 (86.4%), max 12211.77 (144.7%)
    Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 5813.22 - min 5164.90 (88.8%), max 6898.36 (118.7%)
    Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 7239.98 - min 6463.50 (89.3%), max 10268.65 (141.8%)
    --- Disk - Sync/Direct ---
    Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 180.53 - min 164.22 (91.0%), max 206.19 (114.2%)
    Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 375.08 - min 335.73 (89.5%), max 466.27 (124.3%)
    Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 6087.36 - min 4422.46 (72.6%), max 6811.52 (111.9%)
    Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 2120.86 - min 1802.71 (85.0%), max 2621.16 (123.6%)
    

    Look at that! Those NVMes are unearthly fast. In fact I'm angry with @seriesn because Bob somehow got his hands on alien technology and @seriesn shamelessly uses that technology to take the "fair" out of of "fair competition".

    Also note the low spread. What is common with many providers products (min. ca 70%) is what one could call the single exception. All other disk tests are within +-20% and in fact the minima tend more towards 90%.

    Also absolutely noteworthy: The one test that usually is the bad guy (and the one that tells loudest whether any given drive is poor, so so, or great) is Sync/Direct seq. write. And what do we see here? 180. One-hundred-and-eigthy MB/s, and even the 200 MB/s barrier is broken occasionally.
    Ladies and gentlemen, that is what I call a fassst drive!

    Funny and interesting (well, for nerds anyway) side note: Random read in Sync/Direct mode is faster than in buffered mode. What you see there is due to how the stack works. Beneath the VM there always is the node OS/hypervisor (typ. some linux + KVM) and usually that is cached too, plus potentially yet another cache on the hardware Raid card. That is also the reason why you sometimes (like in this case) see inverted (read) seq/rnd ratios that is, in buffered mode one is faster but in sync/direct mode the other one is faster.

    Whatever, all in all this is one of the fastest drives I ever saw, incl. in rather expensive VMs. If you run a database or a dynamic web site this is the VPS you want to get.

    Finally the network results. Here you go

    US LAX lax.download.datapacket.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 63.0 - min 53.6 (85.0%), max 66.0 (104.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 170.6 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 177.0 (103.8%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 171.1 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 177.0 (103.5%)
    
    NO OSL speedtest.osl01.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 26.0 - min 24.5 (94.1%), max 29.2 (112.1%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 328.6 - min 15.3 (4.7%), max 340.1 (103.5%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 346.0 - min 336.8 (97.3%), max 670.9 (193.9%)
    
    US SJC speedtest.sjc01.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 51.0 - min 41.4 (81.3%), max 56.5 (110.9%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 169.3 - min 157.6 (93.1%), max 178.6 (105.5%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 178.6 - min 157.8 (88.4%), max 477.1 (267.2%)
    
    AU MEL speedtest.c1.mel1.dediserve.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 946.3 - min 917.1 (96.9%), max 981.8 (103.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 0.6 - min 0.5 (87.3%), max 2.7 (471.4%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 3.2 - min 1.4 (43.8%), max 5.1 (159.5%)
    
    JP TOK speedtest.tokyo2.linode.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 53.5 - min 50.7 (94.8%), max 55.6 (104.0%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 209.7 - min 208.8 (99.6%), max 231.8 (110.5%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 214.1 - min 208.8 (97.5%), max 231.8 (108.3%)
    
    IT MIL speedtest.mil01.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 29.3 - min 27.5 (93.9%), max 32.5 (110.8%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 298.6 - min 297.6 (99.7%), max 309.9 (103.8%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 299.7 - min 297.6 (99.3%), max 309.9 (103.4%)
    
    TR UNK 185.65.204.169 [F: 1]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 37.3 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 39.7 (106.6%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 286.0 - min 284.7 (99.6%), max 309.4 (108.2%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 286.7 - min 284.8 (99.3%), max 309.4 (107.9%)
    
    FR PAR speedtest.par01.softlayer.com [F: 6]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 24.8 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 30.4 (122.4%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 315.3 - min 314.6 (99.8%), max 319.9 (101.5%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 345.4 - min 314.6 (91.1%), max 1115.5 (323.0%)
    
    SG SGP mirror.sg.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 135.8 - min 127.4 (93.9%), max 137.7 (101.4%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 83.5 - min 83.2 (99.7%), max 86.9 (104.1%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 84.1 - min 83.2 (98.9%), max 108.3 (128.7%)
    
    BR SAO speedtest.sao01.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 27.1 - min 25.1 (92.6%), max 30.4 (112.2%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 330.8 - min 319.1 (96.5%), max 340.1 (102.8%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 346.3 - min 319.8 (92.4%), max 902.6 (260.7%)
    
    IN CHN speedtest.che01.softlayer.com [F: 4]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 42.9 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 51.3 (119.6%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 189.2 - min 188.4 (99.6%), max 191.2 (101.1%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 217.5 - min 188.5 (86.7%), max 1148.1 (527.9%)
    
    GR UNK speedtest.ftp.otenet.gr [F: 16]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 26.6 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 40.0 (150.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 205.5 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 302.2 (147.0%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 223.1 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 1035.9 (464.3%)
    
    US WDC mirror.wdc1.us.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 50.3 - min 45.4 (90.3%), max 51.3 (102.0%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 225.9 - min 224.9 (99.6%), max 229.7 (101.7%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 226.2 - min 224.9 (99.4%), max 232.3 (102.7%)
    
    RU MOS speedtest.hostkey.ru [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 33.6 - min 29.8 (88.6%), max 35.0 (104.2%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 340.3 - min 331.2 (97.3%), max 342.8 (100.7%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 340.5 - min 331.2 (97.3%), max 343.0 (100.7%)
    
    US DAL speedtest.dal05.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 45.3 - min 41.2 (90.9%), max 51.3 (113.2%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 191.5 - min 180.2 (94.1%), max 199.9 (104.4%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 214.5 - min 181.0 (84.4%), max 1115.2 (519.8%)
    
    UK LON speedtest.lon02.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 27.7 - min 25.9 (93.3%), max 30.6 (110.4%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 321.7 - min 320.0 (99.5%), max 376.8 (117.1%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 340.8 - min 320.0 (93.9%), max 1360.5 (399.2%)
    
    US NYC nyc.download.datapacket.com [F: 2]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 45.3 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 51.9 (114.4%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 217.6 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 227.8 (104.7%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 218.2 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 235.8 (108.1%)
    
    RO BUC 185.183.99.8 [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 40.2 - min 39.4 (98.0%), max 41.3 (102.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 285.0 - min 284.5 (99.8%), max 289.1 (101.4%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 286.8 - min 284.5 (99.2%), max 305.3 (106.4%)
    
    NL AMS mirror.nl.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 43.0 - min 41.1 (95.5%), max 44.4 (103.3%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 263.7 - min 263.2 (99.8%), max 265.3 (100.6%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 265.9 - min 263.4 (99.1%), max 271.5 (102.1%)
    
    CN HK mirror.hk.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 93.0 - min 24.7 (26.6%), max 98.3 (105.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 117.4 - min 115.8 (98.6%), max 148.8 (126.8%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 118.1 - min 116.0 (98.2%), max 148.8 (126.0%)
    
    DE FRA fra.lg.core-backbone.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 39.6 - min 38.4 (97.1%), max 40.1 (101.4%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 286.0 - min 282.7 (98.9%), max 295.7 (103.4%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 287.5 - min 283.6 (98.6%), max 296.3 (103.1%)
    

    Front up, I live in Europe and for me there isn't much of a difference between Australia and Mars. Both are damn far away and I have a hard time telling 'good' and 'bad' apart, especially when considering that the whole network market seems to tick quite differently from EU and NA. When I see e.g. NL, AMS 43 Mb/s my alarms go off, but that's just because of my experience. So forgive me if I keep this short; the numbers are there, look at them yourself.

    One thing I can say though is that connectivity within South and East Asia (and of course Oceania) seem to be really decent. Example: ca. 135 Mb/s to Singapore - and stable at that - looks really decent to me. And about 60 Mb/s across the Pacific to California isn't bad either.

    Thanked by 2bdl seriesn
  • @nyamenk said: But there's no promo for Storage VPS

    Inventory has been super tight lately not going to lie :(

    @Gravely said: Poor Sydney

    Oneday or another, one trip or another ;)

    @vyas11 said: *smart approach of that is indeed intentional

    You know me fam. If you didn't read the basics, chances of your reading the TOS is ultra slim :tongue:

  • seriesnseriesn Member
    edited August 2021

    @SinSiXX said: Order Number: 1423245705

    Welcome to the family boss! Do I do the typical bandwidth has been doubled 👊 post? IDK. Should I do? I think i just did. It has been upgraded and bumped 50% <3

    Thanked by 1SinV
  • @bdl said:
    those jokes are a shocker

    HEYYYY! Don't judge me! Being upside down can impact my blood flow.

    @creep said: If only they could have smaller specs for $2/month.

    @gapper said:
    hope nexus bytes could offer $2/mo plans like buyvm in the future without the need of yearly commitment

    Thanks for the comments and suggestions. Sadly with the global IPv4 shortage and payment processor cost going up, it is a very tough decision to make without hurting ourselves financially :(

    Thanked by 1bdl
  • @creep said:
    finally the only worthful SG provider to use on my 300Mbps internet. If only they could have smaller specs for $2/month.

    Was it a hard decision to check your speed, while playing that in the background? Asking for science.

  • @niceboy said:
    Could not resist : Order Number: 6937023964

    <3 <3 Thank you boss for your continued support. It has been upgraded and bumped 50% <3

  • @jsg said:
    Some of you might have taken my post above as fanboy shilling - if so you were dead wrong. And here's the data to prove it.
    Why did I wait a bit? Because I wanted (a) a reasonable amount of results sets, and (b) at the beginning I was (almost) alone on the node but by now I guess the node is (at least almost) full and I wanted those real world numbers.

    The model I benchmarked is the '4G'.

    Version 2.1.0a, (c) 2018+ jsg (->lowendtalk.com)
    Machine: amd64, Arch.: amd64, Model: AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 12-Core Processor            
    OS, version: FreeBSD 13.0, Mem.: 3.990 GB
    CPU - Cores: 4, Family/Model/Stepping: 23/113/0
    Cache: 32K/32K L1d/L1i, 512K L2, 64M L3
    Std. Flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat
              pse36 cflsh mmx fxsr sse sse2 sse3 pclmulqdq ssse3 fma cx16 sse4_1
              sse4_2 popcnt aes xsave osxsave avx f16c rdrnd hypervisor
    Ext. Flags: fsgsbase bmi1 avx2 smep bmi2 syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb
              rdtscp lm lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm cr8_legacy lzcnt sse4a misalignsse
              3dnowprefetch osvw
    
    ProcMem SC [MB/s]: avg 460.1 - min 439.7 (95.6 %), max 481.9 (104.7 %)
    ProcMem MA [MB/s]: avg 1067.8 - min 901.8 (84.5 %), max 1240.0 (116.1 %)
    ProcMem MB [MB/s]: avg 1148.8 - min 945.3 (82.3 %), max 1320.0 (114.9 %)
    

    First a remark re vpsbench itself or more precisely the versions. Since quite a while v. 2.1.0 or 2.1.0.a are used for all my benchmarks and maybe you'll see a v.2.2.0a occasionally. Don't worry, the tests run (and the code) is always the same. v. 2.1.0.a just has a minor change over v. 2.1.0 but not related to the benchmarking core. And 2.2.0[a] is 2.1.0a but with changes for a Windows version (tested with 8.1 and higher) I created for a LET user who had asked me politely and friendly (I didn't have a Windows version in my eyes originally because hell, wo would run VMs on Windows?)

    Now to the beast - and I think you'll agree to calling it 'beast'. 460 single core! four-hundred-sixty! nd of course you'll have AES and other nice flags (like e.g. 'popcnt' or 'hypervisor').
    The single-core spread is really nice and tight and the multi-core spread is decent too. Nice! The only point I like less is that the multi-core gain is relatively low (about 2.5-ish) but that's just Ryzen.

    --- Disk - Buffered ---
    Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 2761.37 - min 2254.39 (81.6%), max 3288.82 (119.1%)
    Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 8438.66 - min 7293.08 (86.4%), max 12211.77 (144.7%)
    Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 5813.22 - min 5164.90 (88.8%), max 6898.36 (118.7%)
    Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 7239.98 - min 6463.50 (89.3%), max 10268.65 (141.8%)
    --- Disk - Sync/Direct ---
    Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 180.53 - min 164.22 (91.0%), max 206.19 (114.2%)
    Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 375.08 - min 335.73 (89.5%), max 466.27 (124.3%)
    Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 6087.36 - min 4422.46 (72.6%), max 6811.52 (111.9%)
    Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 2120.86 - min 1802.71 (85.0%), max 2621.16 (123.6%)
    

    Look at that! Those NVMes are unearthly fast. In fact I'm angry with @seriesn because Bob somehow got his hands on alien technology and @seriesn shamelessly uses that technology to take the "fair" out of of "fair competition".

    Also note the low spread. What is common with many providers products (min. ca 70%) is what one could call the single exception. All other disk tests are within +-20% and in fact the minima tend more towards 90%.

    Also absolutely noteworthy: The one test that usually is the bad guy (and the one that tells loudest whether any given drive is poor, so so, or great) is Sync/Direct seq. write. And what do we see here? 180. One-hundred-and-eigthy MB/s, and even the 200 MB/s barrier is broken occasionally.
    Ladies and gentlemen, that is what I call a fassst drive!

    Funny and interesting (well, for nerds anyway) side note: Random read in Sync/Direct mode is faster than in buffered mode. What you see there is due to how the stack works. Beneath the VM there always is the node OS/hypervisor (typ. some linux + KVM) and usually that is cached too, plus potentially yet another cache on the hardware Raid card. That is also the reason why you sometimes (like in this case) see inverted (read) seq/rnd ratios that is, in buffered mode one is faster but in sync/direct mode the other one is faster.

    Whatever, all in all this is one of the fastest drives I ever saw, incl. in rather expensive VMs. If you run a database or a dynamic web site this is the VPS you want to get.

    Finally the network results. Here you go

    US LAX lax.download.datapacket.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 63.0 - min 53.6 (85.0%), max 66.0 (104.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 170.6 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 177.0 (103.8%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 171.1 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 177.0 (103.5%)
    
    NO OSL speedtest.osl01.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 26.0 - min 24.5 (94.1%), max 29.2 (112.1%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 328.6 - min 15.3 (4.7%), max 340.1 (103.5%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 346.0 - min 336.8 (97.3%), max 670.9 (193.9%)
    
    US SJC speedtest.sjc01.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 51.0 - min 41.4 (81.3%), max 56.5 (110.9%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 169.3 - min 157.6 (93.1%), max 178.6 (105.5%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 178.6 - min 157.8 (88.4%), max 477.1 (267.2%)
    
    AU MEL speedtest.c1.mel1.dediserve.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 946.3 - min 917.1 (96.9%), max 981.8 (103.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 0.6 - min 0.5 (87.3%), max 2.7 (471.4%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 3.2 - min 1.4 (43.8%), max 5.1 (159.5%)
    
    JP TOK speedtest.tokyo2.linode.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 53.5 - min 50.7 (94.8%), max 55.6 (104.0%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 209.7 - min 208.8 (99.6%), max 231.8 (110.5%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 214.1 - min 208.8 (97.5%), max 231.8 (108.3%)
    
    IT MIL speedtest.mil01.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 29.3 - min 27.5 (93.9%), max 32.5 (110.8%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 298.6 - min 297.6 (99.7%), max 309.9 (103.8%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 299.7 - min 297.6 (99.3%), max 309.9 (103.4%)
    
    TR UNK 185.65.204.169 [F: 1]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 37.3 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 39.7 (106.6%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 286.0 - min 284.7 (99.6%), max 309.4 (108.2%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 286.7 - min 284.8 (99.3%), max 309.4 (107.9%)
    
    FR PAR speedtest.par01.softlayer.com [F: 6]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 24.8 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 30.4 (122.4%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 315.3 - min 314.6 (99.8%), max 319.9 (101.5%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 345.4 - min 314.6 (91.1%), max 1115.5 (323.0%)
    
    SG SGP mirror.sg.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 135.8 - min 127.4 (93.9%), max 137.7 (101.4%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 83.5 - min 83.2 (99.7%), max 86.9 (104.1%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 84.1 - min 83.2 (98.9%), max 108.3 (128.7%)
    
    BR SAO speedtest.sao01.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 27.1 - min 25.1 (92.6%), max 30.4 (112.2%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 330.8 - min 319.1 (96.5%), max 340.1 (102.8%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 346.3 - min 319.8 (92.4%), max 902.6 (260.7%)
    
    IN CHN speedtest.che01.softlayer.com [F: 4]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 42.9 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 51.3 (119.6%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 189.2 - min 188.4 (99.6%), max 191.2 (101.1%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 217.5 - min 188.5 (86.7%), max 1148.1 (527.9%)
    
    GR UNK speedtest.ftp.otenet.gr [F: 16]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 26.6 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 40.0 (150.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 205.5 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 302.2 (147.0%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 223.1 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 1035.9 (464.3%)
    
    US WDC mirror.wdc1.us.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 50.3 - min 45.4 (90.3%), max 51.3 (102.0%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 225.9 - min 224.9 (99.6%), max 229.7 (101.7%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 226.2 - min 224.9 (99.4%), max 232.3 (102.7%)
    
    RU MOS speedtest.hostkey.ru [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 33.6 - min 29.8 (88.6%), max 35.0 (104.2%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 340.3 - min 331.2 (97.3%), max 342.8 (100.7%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 340.5 - min 331.2 (97.3%), max 343.0 (100.7%)
    
    US DAL speedtest.dal05.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 45.3 - min 41.2 (90.9%), max 51.3 (113.2%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 191.5 - min 180.2 (94.1%), max 199.9 (104.4%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 214.5 - min 181.0 (84.4%), max 1115.2 (519.8%)
    
    UK LON speedtest.lon02.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 27.7 - min 25.9 (93.3%), max 30.6 (110.4%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 321.7 - min 320.0 (99.5%), max 376.8 (117.1%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 340.8 - min 320.0 (93.9%), max 1360.5 (399.2%)
    
    US NYC nyc.download.datapacket.com [F: 2]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 45.3 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 51.9 (114.4%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 217.6 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 227.8 (104.7%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 218.2 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 235.8 (108.1%)
    
    RO BUC 185.183.99.8 [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 40.2 - min 39.4 (98.0%), max 41.3 (102.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 285.0 - min 284.5 (99.8%), max 289.1 (101.4%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 286.8 - min 284.5 (99.2%), max 305.3 (106.4%)
    
    NL AMS mirror.nl.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 43.0 - min 41.1 (95.5%), max 44.4 (103.3%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 263.7 - min 263.2 (99.8%), max 265.3 (100.6%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 265.9 - min 263.4 (99.1%), max 271.5 (102.1%)
    
    CN HK mirror.hk.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 93.0 - min 24.7 (26.6%), max 98.3 (105.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 117.4 - min 115.8 (98.6%), max 148.8 (126.8%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 118.1 - min 116.0 (98.2%), max 148.8 (126.0%)
    
    DE FRA fra.lg.core-backbone.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 39.6 - min 38.4 (97.1%), max 40.1 (101.4%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 286.0 - min 282.7 (98.9%), max 295.7 (103.4%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 287.5 - min 283.6 (98.6%), max 296.3 (103.1%)
    

    Front up, I live in Europe and for me there isn't much of a difference between Australia and Mars. Both are damn far away and I have a hard time telling 'good' and 'bad' apart, especially when considering that the whole network market seems to tick quite differently from EU and NA. When I see e.g. NL, AMS 43 Mb/s my alarms go off, but that's just because of my experience. So forgive me if I keep this short; the numbers are there, look at them yourself.

    One thing I can say though is that connectivity within South and East Asia (and of course Oceania) seem to be really decent. Example: ca. 135 Mb/s to Singapore - and stable at that - looks really decent to me. And about 60 Mb/s across the Pacific to California isn't bad either.

    <3 Love the continued support and as always, super detailed feedback fam <3

  • Ohw... discount, I like that! :)
    Order number: 9388700362
    Paid, waiting for verification.

  • IziDIziD Member

    Let's give it a go. Order Number: 9441874487

  • seriesnseriesn Member
    edited August 2021

    @Jorge said:
    Ohw... discount, I like that! :)
    Order number: 9388700362
    Paid, waiting for verification.

    Sorry bout the hiccup :(

    @IziD said:
    Let's give it a go. Order Number: 9441874487

    Boom boom done! Welcome to the family <3

  • IziDIziD Member
    edited August 2021

    @seriesn said: Boom boom done! Welcome to the family <3

    Glad to be part of it. Math is interesting though:

    • Advertised bandwidth: 250 GB (300 GB with Annual Payment) @ 1Gbit
    • Limit in CP after the "Free 50% bandwidth upgrade": 450 Gb

    Not seeing myself using 450Gb/month, merely curious about the formula used to calculate it.

  • @IziD said:

    @seriesn said: Boom boom done! Welcome to the family <3

    Glad to be part of it. Math is interesting though:

    • Advertised bandwidth: 250 GB (300 GB with Annual Payment) @ 1Gbit
    • Limit in CP after the "Free 50% bandwidth upgrade": 450 Gb

    Not seeing myself using 450Gb/month, merely curious about the formula used to calculate it.

    50% of 300 = 150.

    300 + 150 = 450

    More the merrier I guess haha <3

    Thanked by 1IziD
  • @seriesn said:

    • 20% off APAC Region: AULAUNCH
    • Free 50% bandwidth upgrade, If your order contains the above discount code and

    Many thanks for the extra bandwidth:)

    Order Number: 4858747329

  • @swat4 said:

    @seriesn said:

    • 20% off APAC Region: AULAUNCH
    • Free 50% bandwidth upgrade, If your order contains the above discount code and

    Many thanks for the extra bandwidth:)

    Order Number: 4858747329

    <3 Thank you for the continued love <3

  • Hi :) order number is 9908083789. Very excited to have another idler :*

  • @tmagicturtle said:
    Hi :) order number is 9908083789. Very excited to have another idler :*

    Thanked by 1tmagicturtle
  • Does anyone know what the typical ticket response time is with Nexus Bytes? I was hoping to setup email on my personal domain yesterday but my order was flagged. I replied to the automatically generated email and haven’t heard back yet - it’s been about 22 hours so far.

    My plan today was to migrate a few clients to a Melbourne VPS and if all went well, move the rest to a New York VPS by Friday. I got cold feet with the ticket response time and have gone with another provider today (already ordered and setup). I’d still like to try out the email service having read such glowing reviews in this and other threads and hate leaving things on a sour note.

  • vyas11vyas11 Member
    edited August 2021

    @avocet said:
    Does anyone know what the typical ticket response time is with Nexus Bytes? I was hoping to setup email on my personal domain yesterday but my order was flagged. I replied to the automatically generated email and haven’t heard back yet - it’s been about 22 hours so far.

    My plan today was to migrate a few clients to a Melbourne VPS and if all went well, move the rest to a New York VPS by Friday. I got cold feet with the ticket response time and have gone with another provider today (already ordered and setup). I’d still like to try out the email service having read such glowing reviews in this and other threads and hate leaving things on a sour note.

    @seriesn
    Jay, looks like you need to keep the whip cracking on weekends also. No rest for the weary. double up your support team for a sub $10 a year service man,

    Thanked by 1nyamenk
  • @avocet said:
    Does anyone know what the typical ticket response time is with Nexus Bytes? I was hoping to setup email on my personal domain yesterday but my order was flagged. I replied to the automatically generated email and haven’t heard back yet - it’s been about 22 hours so far.

    My plan today was to migrate a few clients to a Melbourne VPS and if all went well, move the rest to a New York VPS by Friday. I got cold feet with the ticket response time and have gone with another provider today (already ordered and setup). I’d still like to try out the email service having read such glowing reviews in this and other threads and hate leaving things on a sour note.

    What’s up boss. Sales and billing tickets are pushed back during weekends unless it’s an urgent one (account suspended/up for term etc).

    Technical issues related are responded and solved usually within in an hour or two unless it takes extra troubleshooting.

    Got around 31 tickets I need to get back to. I hope to get back to you shortly :).

    Sorry about that.

    Thanked by 1avocet
  • @avocet said:
    Does anyone know what the typical ticket response time is with Nexus Bytes? I was hoping to setup email on my personal domain yesterday but my order was flagged. I replied to the automatically generated email and haven’t heard back yet - it’s been about 22 hours so far.

    My plan today was to migrate a few clients to a Melbourne VPS and if all went well, move the rest to a New York VPS by Friday. I got cold feet with the ticket response time and have gone with another provider today (already ordered and setup). I’d still like to try out the email service having read such glowing reviews in this and other threads and hate leaving things on a sour note.

    Tech support is super fast. Most of the times I got a response/resolution within 30 minutes.

    Thanked by 1avocet
  • @seriesn said:
    What’s up boss. Sales and billing tickets are pushed back during weekends unless it’s an urgent one (account suspended/up for term etc).

    Technical issues related are responded and solved usually within in an hour or two unless it takes extra troubleshooting.

    Got around 31 tickets I need to get back to. I hope to get back to you shortly :).

    Sorry about that.

    No problem and thanks for the update, totally understandable. I’m happy to hold my hands up if my expectations were unrealistic. Sunday is my quietest day for receiving email so I was hoping to get the DNS changes propagated then. I’m using Cloudflare for the websites so they weren’t an issue.

    Thanked by 1seriesn
  • gappergapper Member
    edited August 2021

    Well NexusBytes rocks and uncle Bob is the best but to be fair, I have to say that their ticket reply time (appropiate reply not the typical "we will look into this") is way longer than other providers of same price like BuyVM and RamNode.

    They can certainly improve in that aspect.

    Thanked by 2nyamenk seriesn
  • @gapper said:
    Well NexusBytes rocks and uncle Bob is the best but to be fair, I have to say that their ticket reply time (appropiate reply not the typical "we will look into this") is way longer than other providers of same price like BuyVM and RamNode.

    They can certainly improve in that aspect.

    Thanks boss. Fair enough. We are going through growth pain and sometimes, when tickets are demanding/requires either manual approval or admin intervention, it can take a ted bit longer. With that said, we have 1 more team member joining in the next 3 weeks to help with the overall process :)

    Thanked by 1gapper
  • @avocet said:

    @seriesn said:
    What’s up boss. Sales and billing tickets are pushed back during weekends unless it’s an urgent one (account suspended/up for term etc).

    Technical issues related are responded and solved usually within in an hour or two unless it takes extra troubleshooting.

    Got around 31 tickets I need to get back to. I hope to get back to you shortly :).

    Sorry about that.

    No problem and thanks for the update, totally understandable. I’m happy to hold my hands up if my expectations were unrealistic. Sunday is my quietest day for receiving email so I was hoping to get the DNS changes propagated then. I’m using Cloudflare for the websites so they weren’t an issue.

    Should be all done boss <3 Welcome to the family.

  • @seriesn said:
    Should be all done boss <3 Welcome to the family.

    From my experience thus far, everything works great and configuration was a breeze. On Wednesday, I plan to move the DNS to Cloudflare and I'll add the DKIM record at the same time.

    Thanks! :)

  • @avocet said:

    @seriesn said:
    Should be all done boss <3 Welcome to the family.

    From my experience thus far, everything works great and configuration was a breeze. On Wednesday, I plan to move the DNS to Cloudflare and I'll add the DKIM record at the same time.

    Thanks! :)

    <3

Sign In or Register to comment.