ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    ServerBear Performance Comparison of Rackspace, Digital Ocean, Linode and Vultr

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT Discussion
    serverbearserver benchmarkingrackspaceiaasvpsdigital oceanvultrcentoscentos 7linuxlinux serverkvmxen
    56 Posts 12 Posters 18.6k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • dafyreD
      dafyre
      last edited by dafyre

      It is odd to see that DO has the lowest IO rate, but the overall second highest score.

      Edit: Fixed typo.

      travisdh1T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • travisdh1T
        travisdh1 @dafyre
        last edited by travisdh1

        @dafyre said:

        It is odd to see that DO has the lowest IO rate, but the overall highest score.

        IOPS it makes sense. Yes, write is slower, but read is crazy fast. Or do I have the read/write reversed? I'm used to seeing things listing read first 😳

        scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • wirestyle22W
          wirestyle22
          last edited by

          Vultr with that NJ location. Hi handsome.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • scottalanmillerS
            scottalanmiller @IRJ
            last edited by

            @IRJ said:

            @scottalanmiller Is lower better?

            Lower what exactly?

            IRJI 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • scottalanmillerS
              scottalanmiller @travisdh1
              last edited by

              @travisdh1 said:

              @dafyre said:

              It is odd to see that DO has the lowest IO rate, but the overall highest score.

              IOPS it makes sense. Yes, write is slower, but read is crazy fast. Or do I have the read/write reversed? I'm used to seeing things listing read first 😳

              I wrote the header backwards.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
              • IRJI
                IRJ @scottalanmiller
                last edited by

                @scottalanmiller said:

                @IRJ said:

                @scottalanmiller Is lower better?

                Lower what exactly?

                bench

                scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • scottalanmillerS
                  scottalanmiller @IRJ
                  last edited by

                  @IRJ said:

                  @scottalanmiller said:

                  @IRJ said:

                  @scottalanmiller Is lower better?

                  Lower what exactly?

                  bench

                  Higher is better. I think that IOPS are a small amount, if any, of that score. It's about computational performance.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • wirestyle22W
                    wirestyle22 @scottalanmiller
                    last edited by wirestyle22

                    @scottalanmiller said:

                    We need some latency numbers from around the world. Anyone want to collect some for us?

                    Here is the first IP address. A long running ping (hundreds or thousands of pings) would be good, we need the final stats from that:

                    • 104.236.119.59
                    • 108.61.151.173
                    • 172.99.75.133

                    We have a good idea on bandwidth, IO, CPU and memory. Network latency is pretty huge.

                    104.236.119.59 = 8 MS Average 1,000 pings
                    108.61.151.173 = 7 MS Average 1,000 pings
                    Mangolassi.it (162.242.243.171) = 14 MS average 500 pings

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • scottalanmillerS
                      scottalanmiller
                      last edited by

                      Whoops, sorry. We just killed the RS node because it is expensive 🙂

                      You can test that RS ping against mangolassi.it instead. Same location, same node type. Sorry.

                      dafyreD wirestyle22W 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • dafyreD
                        dafyre @scottalanmiller
                        last edited by dafyre

                        @scottalanmiller said:

                        Whoops, sorry. We just killed the RS node because it is expensive 🙂

                        You can test that RS ping against mangolassi.it instead. Same location, same node type. Sorry.

                        With the RS nodes being so expensive... why would you not stand them up on DO or Vultr?

                        Edit: I mean for production and not tests like this.

                        scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • wirestyle22W
                          wirestyle22 @scottalanmiller
                          last edited by wirestyle22

                          @scottalanmiller said:

                          Whoops, sorry. We just killed the RS node because it is expensive 🙂

                          You can test that RS ping against mangolassi.it instead. Same location, same node type. Sorry.

                          Running now. Will update my above post.

                          scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • scottalanmillerS
                            scottalanmiller @dafyre
                            last edited by

                            @dafyre said:

                            @scottalanmiller said:

                            Whoops, sorry. We just killed the RS node because it is expensive 🙂

                            You can test that RS ping against mangolassi.it instead. Same location, same node type. Sorry.

                            With the RS nodes being so expensive... why would you not stand them up on DO or Vultr?

                            Edit: I mean for production and not tests like this.

                            Well DO and Vultr were not well known or well tested at the time that most of the RS nodes were created. And RS still offers a lot of features that those do not, like load balancers. But these days, the advantages to RS are fewer and fewer.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • scottalanmillerS
                              scottalanmiller @wirestyle22
                              last edited by

                              @wirestyle22 said:

                              @scottalanmiller said:

                              Whoops, sorry. We just killed the RS node because it is expensive 🙂

                              You can test that RS ping against mangolassi.it instead. Same location, same node type. Sorry.

                              Running now

                              Thanks

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • scottalanmillerS
                                scottalanmiller
                                last edited by

                                Right now, we are favouring a migration to Vultr. But the Linode test is running and is a major contender. Information on that to follow....

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                • wirestyle22W
                                  wirestyle22
                                  last edited by

                                  updated above

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • brianlittlejohnB
                                    brianlittlejohn
                                    last edited by

                                    Ping statistics for 108.61.151.173:
                                    Packets: Sent = 204, Received = 203, Lost = 1 (0% loss),
                                    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
                                    Minimum = 58ms, Maximum = 62ms, Average = 58ms

                                    Ping statistics for 104.236.119.59:
                                    Packets: Sent = 231, Received = 229, Lost = 2 (0% loss),
                                    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
                                    Minimum = 56ms, Maximum = 66ms, Average = 56ms

                                    Ping statistics for 162.242.243.171:
                                    Packets: Sent = 95, Received = 94, Lost = 1 (1% loss),
                                    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
                                    Minimum = 51ms, Maximum = 56ms, Average = 51ms

                                    About the same from west Texas.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • scottalanmillerS
                                      scottalanmiller
                                      last edited by

                                      OMG WE HAVE A WINNER!!!!

                                      Linode just took everyone out back and took their lunch money!! They have load balancers too!! (a la Rackspace and Amazone.) Look at that IO capacity!!! And that UNIX Bench! Their single thread was by far the fastest too!

                                      wirestyle22W 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
                                      • wirestyle22W
                                        wirestyle22 @scottalanmiller
                                        last edited by wirestyle22

                                        @scottalanmiller said:

                                        OMG WE HAVE A WINNER!!!!

                                        Linode just took everyone out back and took their lunch money!! They have load balancers too!! (a la Rackspace and Amazone.) Look at that IO capacity!!! And that UNIX Bench! Their single thread was by far the fastest too!

                                        Wow. That's fantastic.

                                        scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • scottalanmillerS
                                          scottalanmiller @wirestyle22
                                          last edited by

                                          @wirestyle22 said:

                                          Wow. That's fantastic.

                                          I'm so excited. No question that they are by FAR the hardest to use, but who cares. That performance is crazy!!

                                          wirestyle22W 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                          • wirestyle22W
                                            wirestyle22 @scottalanmiller
                                            last edited by

                                            @scottalanmiller said:

                                            @wirestyle22 said:

                                            Wow. That's fantastic.

                                            I'm so excited. No question that they are by FAR the hardest to use, but who cares. That performance is crazy!!

                                            Rewarded complexity is fine by me 😄

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 3
                                            • 3 / 3
                                            • First post
                                              Last post