Howdy, Stranger!

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

Advertise on LowEndTalk.com
LEBRE-X Review: Nexus Bytes VPS
New on LowEndTalk? Please read our 'Community Rules' by clicking on it in the right menu!

LEBRE-X Review: Nexus Bytes VPS

The first LEBRE Xtended review is out for Nexus Bytes. A total of 33 days of benchmark data measuring CPU/RAM, disk and network performance was used to create charts and compute descriptive statistics to provide insights into the real-world reliability of Nexus Bytes. Read it here: https://lowendboxes.review/lebre-x-nexus-bytes-ryzen-nvme-vps/

Long story short: the actual performance is on par with what's promised on paper.

I have similar amounts of data for VPSes from another three more white-listed providers, which will be progressively released in the coming weeks.

Deals and Reviews: LowEndBoxes Review | Avoid dodgy providers with The LEBRE Whitelist | Free hosting (with conditions): Evolution-Host, NanoKVM, FreeMach, ServedEZ | Follow latest deals on Twitter or Telegram

Comments

  • seriesnseriesn Member, Top Provider
    edited January 16

    Just to echo what I said on the other forum,
    Thanks for your kind words and detailed feedback. Really appreciate it.

    End of the day, I am just happy knowing my family members got what they paid for and some more and they are happy :)

  • When you will be expanding to APAC location boss ? @seriesn

    quam bene vivas refert non quam diu

  • seriesnseriesn Member, Top Provider

    @Deepak_leb said:
    When you will be expanding to APAC location boss ? @seriesn

    Boss, Just trying to avoid being yet another ovh host, unless I can get a decent bandwidth pricing, that doesn't route back from LA. It is in the pipeline but no ETA yet :(

    Thanked by 2Deepak_leb poisson
  • The iperf3 numbers are definitely in bytes and not bits? Iperf defaults to bits.

  • @TimboJones said:
    The iperf3 numbers are definitely in bytes and not bits? Iperf defaults to bits.

    If you did read, all the units were spelled out.

    Deals and Reviews: LowEndBoxes Review | Avoid dodgy providers with The LEBRE Whitelist | Free hosting (with conditions): Evolution-Host, NanoKVM, FreeMach, ServedEZ | Follow latest deals on Twitter or Telegram

  • @seriesn said:

    @Deepak_leb said:
    When you will be expanding to APAC location boss ? @seriesn

    Boss, Just trying to avoid being yet another ovh host, unless I can get a decent bandwidth pricing, that doesn't route back from LA. It is in the pipeline but no ETA yet :(

    Potassium-Ion batteries will power the world before bandwidth in Australia is priced decently..

    Purveyor of high quality potassium

  • @poisson said:

    @TimboJones said:
    The iperf3 numbers are definitely in bytes and not bits? Iperf defaults to bits.

    If you did read, all the units were spelled out.

    It's called confirmation, which is why I specifically said bytes in my question. I did read and questioned it since you'd have to do an extra conversion and lose granularity (speeds are generally reported in bits, not bytes). So it seems wrong and pointless. Next time, just say, "yes, I intentionally changed format to bytes", otherwise it just looks like you didn't read and gave a snarky response.

    Try giving that response when one of your academic colleagues are reviewing your results and asks a question, see how much/little they'll think of your attitude after that.

  • @TimboJones said:

    @poisson said:

    @TimboJones said:
    The iperf3 numbers are definitely in bytes and not bits? Iperf defaults to bits.

    If you did read, all the units were spelled out.

    It's called confirmation, which is why I specifically said bytes in my question. I did read and questioned it since you'd have to do an extra conversion and lose granularity (speeds are generally reported in bits, not bytes). So it seems wrong and pointless. Next time, just say, "yes, I intentionally changed format to bytes", otherwise it just looks like you didn't read and gave a snarky response.

    Try giving that response when one of your academic colleagues are reviewing your results and asks a question, see how much/little they'll think of your attitude after that.

    I am very sure the granularity of a few bits out of a variable measured in hundreds of thousands or millions of bits makes a big difference. Also, this is written for a general audience.

    I have little patience for people who do not read and ask questions where the answer is already given. If you seek to be spoonfed, I will treat you as a kid. Academics are pedants who read every single word and no academic will ask such a noob question.

    Thanked by 2sonic dahartigan

    Deals and Reviews: LowEndBoxes Review | Avoid dodgy providers with The LEBRE Whitelist | Free hosting (with conditions): Evolution-Host, NanoKVM, FreeMach, ServedEZ | Follow latest deals on Twitter or Telegram

  • hzrhzr Member, Moderator

    Peer-reviewed low end journal.

    Thanked by 2poisson seriesn
  • xaocxaoc Member

    @TimboJones said:

    @poisson said:

    @TimboJones said:
    The iperf3 numbers are definitely in bytes and not bits? Iperf defaults to bits.

    If you did read, all the units were spelled out.

    It's called confirmation, which is why I specifically said bytes in my question. I did read and questioned it since you'd have to do an extra conversion and lose granularity (speeds are generally reported in bits, not bytes). So it seems wrong and pointless. Next time, just say, "yes, I intentionally changed format to bytes", otherwise it just looks like you didn't read and gave a snarky response.

    Try giving that response when one of your academic colleagues are reviewing your results and asks a question, see how much/little they'll think of your attitude after that.

    Try not giving a frak about what others think of your insert whatever here, see how easy life is then.

    So Say We All

  • Although I’m using shared hosting but server is pretty good and up ..
    my vote for you +1 (Nexus Bytes)

  • @hzr said:
    Peer-reviewed low end journal.

    By "researchers" with self-anointed credentials. I am pretty sure that engineers wouldn't have been able to build any shit insisting on the granularity of the value of pi.

    Deals and Reviews: LowEndBoxes Review | Avoid dodgy providers with The LEBRE Whitelist | Free hosting (with conditions): Evolution-Host, NanoKVM, FreeMach, ServedEZ | Follow latest deals on Twitter or Telegram

  • @poisson said:

    @TimboJones said:

    @poisson said:

    @TimboJones said:
    The iperf3 numbers are definitely in bytes and not bits? Iperf defaults to bits.

    If you did read, all the units were spelled out.

    It's called confirmation, which is why I specifically said bytes in my question. I did read and questioned it since you'd have to do an extra conversion and lose granularity (speeds are generally reported in bits, not bytes). So it seems wrong and pointless. Next time, just say, "yes, I intentionally changed format to bytes", otherwise it just looks like you didn't read and gave a snarky response.

    Try giving that response when one of your academic colleagues are reviewing your results and asks a question, see how much/little they'll think of your attitude after that.

    I am very sure the granularity of a few bits out of a variable measured in hundreds of thousands or millions of bits makes a big difference. Also, this is written for a general audience.

    I'm confused, did you record results in Megabits (iperf3 default output format) or Megabytes? Your graph says Megabytes and you just said bits. Your units are in Megabytes converting to bits is 8X different, not "a few bits". This isn't about precision, this is about being wrong by a factor of 8X if you got Megabit results and representing as Megabytes.

    I'm not saying you have it wrong, simply there's a potential because Megabytes units is a deviation from default setting and asking for confirmation. I see three possibilities:

    1) you ran iperf3 with format option to record results in Megabytes and graph is correct.

    2) you ran iperf3 with default format and manually divided by 8 and plotted the graph and graph is correct.

    3) you ran iperf3 with default format and have wrong results by 8 times. Corrective action changing graph from Megabytes to Megabits.

    "Note that we present our date in megabytes per second."

    Having now re-read your review, this implies you are intentionally representing the data in Megabytes, I just don't know why. But whatever, I'm lazy.

  • @TimboJones said:

    @poisson said:

    @TimboJones said:

    @poisson said:

    @TimboJones said:
    The iperf3 numbers are definitely in bytes and not bits? Iperf defaults to bits.

    If you did read, all the units were spelled out.

    It's called confirmation, which is why I specifically said bytes in my question. I did read and questioned it since you'd have to do an extra conversion and lose granularity (speeds are generally reported in bits, not bytes). So it seems wrong and pointless. Next time, just say, "yes, I intentionally changed format to bytes", otherwise it just looks like you didn't read and gave a snarky response.

    Try giving that response when one of your academic colleagues are reviewing your results and asks a question, see how much/little they'll think of your attitude after that.

    I am very sure the granularity of a few bits out of a variable measured in hundreds of thousands or millions of bits makes a big difference. Also, this is written for a general audience.

    Having now re-read your review, this implies you are intentionally representing the data in Megabytes, I just don't know why. But whatever, I'm lazy.

    That's the sound of the penny dropping..

    Purveyor of high quality potassium

  • JordJord Moderator, Provider

    @seriesn is the boss.

    Thanked by 3thedp seriesn poisson

    BillingServ - Easy, simple, and hassle-free online invoicing solution. Contact us today.
    BaseServ Certified to ISO/IEC 27001:2013

Sign In or Register to comment.