Whats the difference between a 'lowend' VPS and a 'highend' VPS?

[vpsnewb]

Seems to be a lot of places offering VPS services at very cheap prices. Why do some companies offer similar VPS specs for, say, $7/mo whereas another company offers it for $20/mo? Are there any differences in the quality?

My concern with a cheap VPS is a poor network. I've paid $30/mo for a VPS with 512MB RAM before, and now I pay $22~/mo for a VPS with 1.5GB RAM and cPanel. There doesn't seem to be much of a performance difference.

I honestly think some people just feel more comfortable paying more money for something sometimes, even if they can get the same product/service with relatively identical performance for less. It's just the mental aspect of thinking if it costs more, it's likely better, and my hosting needs require the best.

What do you guys think?

 

[HalfEatenPie]

Well honestly it depends on what that provider's focusing on mostly.  Personally at Catalyst (I'm not trying to toot our own horn here), we try to focus on not only quality hardware but also quality bandwidth.  This means we look at the datacenter itself and look up their upstream providers, focus on how beneficial it is (even geographically), and test their network.  We can get hardware anywhere that we can guarantee will work, but we'd prefer to make sure our customers also get the best network we can find.  

Now, this may also be why our standard pricing may be a bit higher than what the next guy has, but this is how we operate and how we make sure we stay open.  In addition to that, we like to think of every client we take on as a partner in our company.  Not only are they getting our brand of hardware and bandwidth, but also our brand of system administration.  We actively monitor our nodes for any abuse and just clients not following the fair use policy in place.  

So honestly yeah you can compare each host by their price tags, but personally (being a provider) I've come to look at more than just the price, but at who's running the show.  If I like it, I usually end up using that company's product (VPS) more.  

Just making this clear, I consider myself more as a customer than a provider.  Look at the other thread and you'll see a small part of my personal VPS collection.  

 

[vpsnewb]

Good explanation.

In previous endeavors, I offered services at a higher cost than average on the kick of no overselling and 'dedicated resources'. Growth was slow at first (and after 2 years I sold it off) but I found it easier and more enjoyable to support less clients who pay more as opposed to more clients who pay less. The benefit was that despite have a relatively 'small' client base, I genuinely found them easy to work with and easy to manage. I now work for a large budget host, and while I enjoy what I do the experience is much different. In hindsight, I could of easily oversold slightly as there were many wasted resources from sites that simply did not 'require' premium hosting.

I guess in the end it really just depends on the services. Sure, a $50/mo VPS that is $5/mo somewhere else may benchmark better with less containers on the same node or from better hardware, or any combination of that, but at the end of the day would most actually be able to benefit? In regards to performance, I think only sites/projects capable of utilizing the resources given to them would witness any sort of benefit.

 

[HalfEatenPie]

I agree with your statement there.  

I actually recently got a VPS from a provider that's considered "expensive" (256mb for $10/month), but the reason why I'm continuing to pay my bills for that container is because it's actually located in a great facility with great upstream/bandwidth providers.  The network is so great (and honestly, there's a lot you can do with 256mb) that I find it worthy of the 10 dollars a month.  

I guess what it does come down to is the question "Is the extra investment on this service really worth it?" 

 

[ReThinkVPS]

The price.  If you find the right provider there should be no difference.

 

[blergh]

As HEP stated, there is quiet a few things to it all. But support, hardware, location and such is of utmost importance.

 

[drmike]

Well the difference between the $30 vs. $7 plan with same ad specs?

Typically, a $7 host is going to massively oversubscribe the server.  Tons of containers, often way too many without the resources to actually be used by the paying customers.

Good example of this is Chicag*VPS and their 2GB offers at $7 and way less a month.   He was packing upwards of 125 I think it was customers on servers with 32GB of RAM.  

In the welfare cost model, it is all about massively oversubscribed and hoping you have plenty of paying but not using customers.

$30 VPS should be more likely to have resources you are paying for available.  No guarantees though.  Plenty of pricier providers who are just as shady.

As for the network performance, both price points have plenty of bad networks being QoS"d.  

Really very hard to find reliable and honest providers.

Can someone else recommend to the OP a provider who offers 2GB accounts at realistic price and delivers the goods?

 

[concerto49]

The price.  If you find the right provider there should be no difference.

Not exactly. It depends on how far they've discounted and taken from the margins. Some advertise 24/7 support with just 1-2 people not necessarily covering all the hours for example and often not weekends at all. Staff costs money and quality staff costs more. Sure you can say unmanaged, but that's the VPS. Other issues can crop up.

 

[joe]

Good example of this is Chicag*VPS and their 2GB offers at $7 and way less a month.   He was packing upwards of 125 I think it was customers on servers with 32GB of RAM.  

I currently have 2 VPSs with ChicagoVPS, one of those 2GB for $7 and a 3GB for $7. I couldn't be more happy with them. I get great performance and rarely ever have a problem. And I actually use them, the 3GB one only has a few hundred MB of free memory...

 

[GVH-Jon]

A low-end vps would be considered a "budget" vps. It's nothing premium, but it's okay if you're budget strapped.

A high-end VPS would be considered a "quality/premium" vps and is typically priced significantly higher than low end VPSes.

Some virtual servers with the same specifications from one company may be cheaper than another who has the same specifications simply because the other provider has better bulk pricing. There are many factors that come into play.

 

[trewq]

Versatile IT has always been a $7 and below provider. This most mostly due to our primary market being LET/B. However we have never offered services that do not have dedicated resources.

I pay ~$40/month for 512MB RAM with a provider here in Australia. The node never goes down and the only issues I've had has been when their upstream providers all had maintenance at the same time. Even then they managed to route their traffic through one of their other data centers leaving only 5 minutes of downtime.

You get what you pay for more or less. If it is 100% mission critical you pay more. If you can afford a server reboot here and there then go for a budget provider.