KS dedicated server or vps?

peterw

New Member
A lot of people are talking about the OVH low end dedicated server. An Atom cpu and a single hard disk. But 500GB of harddisk, 2GB of RAM and unlimited bandwith.

Yearly costs: 47,84€ or 63$. A budget of 5$ a month.

If I look to the known providers I get

  • 512MB of RAM
  • 50 GB of diskspace
  • 1-2 shared "cores"
If I look to openvz.io or waveride I get:

  • 3072MB of RAM
  • 50GB of diskspace
  • 3 shared "cores"

I do my backups and I am happy with an IO of 100Mbit/s so raid is not a argument. Bandwith is a plus for the dedicated server.

1Gbit port means 10800 GB per month. If I use the limited 500GB traffic I would use 4,6% of the potential traffic.

100 Mbit port means 1080 GB per month. If I use the limited 500GB traffic I would use 46% of the potential traffic.

100Mbit port is enough for my usage and if I look to the numbers the bandwith of vps servers with 100 Mbit port are highly oversold. So again a plus for the low end dedicated server.

Same with the cpu. All offers talk about number of cores but openvz is managing threads. We are not allowed to use 100% of the virtual cores. We are not allowed to abuse the system load.

My result is that I will not buy any oversold offers but I will rent one of the low end dedicated servers because I am able to use 100% of the resources at any time.

Did I miss some arguments?
 

happel

New Member
I do my backups and I am happy with an IO of 100Mbit/s so raid is not a argument. Bandwith is a plus for the dedicated server.

1Gbit port means 10800 GB per month. If I use the limited 500GB traffic I would use 4,6% of the potential traffic.

100 Mbit port means 1080 GB per month. If I use the limited 500GB traffic I would use 46% of the potential traffic.
I'm not sure about your math here...

This seems more accurate to me.

100mbit = 12.5mb per second = 750 mb per minute = 45000 mb per hour = 1080 gb per day = 32400 gb per month (30 days)
 

concerto49

New Member
Verified Provider
I'm not sure about your math here...

This seems more accurate to me.

100mbit = 12.5mb per second = 750 mb per minute = 45000 mb per hour = 1080 gb per day = 32400 gb per month (30 days)
It's duplex by the way.
 

peterw

New Member
Got it


1Gbit port means 105400 GB per day, 316400 GB per month . If I use the limited 500GB traffic I would use 0.16% of the potential traffic.

100 Mbit port means 1054 GB per day, 31640 GB per month. If I use the limited 500GB traffic I would use 1.58% of the potential traffic.
It's duplex by the way.
Down/Up ratio may be different on each service. Even if you split it equal it makes not much difference if I can use 0.16% or 0.08% of a 1Gbit port.
 

circus

New Member
If your data is not important and you don't need support, then KS. Actually with that price there is no reason to get vps if it just to play around.
 

wlanboy

Content Contributer
A lot of people are talking about the OVH low end dedicated server. An Atom cpu and a single hard disk. But 500GB of harddisk, 2GB of RAM and unlimited bandwith.

Same with the cpu. All offers talk about number of cores but openvz is managing threads. We are not allowed to use 100% of the virtual cores. We are not allowed to abuse the system load.

My result is that I will not buy any oversold offers but I will rent one of the low end dedicated servers because I am able to use 100% of the resources at any time.
That is the plus when you use dedicated resources.

Of course. So you would end up with a max of 64800gb for the 100mbit and 648000gb for the 1000mbit.


Which both make the 500gb bandwidth limit look like a very small number.
Look at the number of vps which have to share the 100mbit port.

That is the reason for the bandwith caps. If everyone is able to use the port without limits everyone is getting about 1mbit/s.

I doubt you can push that much bandwidth with that processor and drives...
I think he will be able to push more GBs than on any vps plan available.

As happel calculated: 32400 gb per month

Even if the cpu is only able to hold 10% of the bandwith -> That's a wopping 3.5 TB.

If your data is not important and you don't need support, then KS. Actually with that price there is no reason to get vps if it just to play around.
Yup - backups are fine - but you have to reinstall OS and afterwards restore your services and your data.

But most important point: You have to care about just everything.

OVH will only help on hardware failures. Everything else is out-of-service.

Nothing for me - I get used to write polite and short tickets and someone else is fixing network/disk/restarts etc. - the latter due to SolusVM-less providers.
 

pcan

New Member
Did I miss some arguments?
Yes: should a failure happen, the Kimsufi server could remain offline for a relatively long time. OVH will put the ticket on the lowest priority queue. The VPS is on a shared infrastructure; any failure will impact a large number of customers, and therefore will hopefully be solved in a short time.
 

concerto49

New Member
Verified Provider
Yes: should a failure happen, the Kimsufi server could remain offline for a relatively long time. OVH will put the ticket on the lowest priority queue. The VPS is on a shared infrastructure; any failure will impact a large number of customers, and therefore will hopefully be solved in a short time.
Yes/no. The VPS Node ("server") is part of the managed contract by the provider (or so I hope so and we do). This means that if it goes down or suffers any problems we fix it. Only the VPS part is unmanaged/managed depending on the plan.
 
Top