96MB Low End VPS Review Part 51 – Amanah Tech 512MB VPS
It is rare to find a decent low end VPS provider in Canada, let alone in Toronto, Ontario. It is pretty interesting because you would think that in every metropolitan city, the economies of scale will simply bring down the cost of VPS providers. However, apparently, the rules are not the same in Canada and therefore, when Amanah Technology offered a free VPS to try for a month, I immediately took the dive and ordered one.
Of course, later on Amanah has come up with a even more surprising offer to give people free VPS for life, which was mentioned in my previous post here, and although the specification was a bit low end, it was nonetheless one of the most stable VPS I have had. Some of the screenshots in this review will be based off the free low end VPS, however all tests on the VPS itself was taken on the free for a month VPS.
Quick check on my free-for-life VPS with them:
uptime 07:28:17 up 50 days, 12:45, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Basic Information and Set Up
As per their post on WHT, here is the specification of the VPS that I have received:
The order page is a customized WHMCS system in HTTPS protocol and you can choose between three packages they have for their server:
Choose Bronze and you can get to the detailed order page:
As you can see, the regular price is 20 per month, which is not exactly low end, and…what? $20 setup fee? Quite frankly speaking I do not even remember when was the last time I have seen any providers charging a set up fee for VPS. I mean, for dedicated server yes, since there is a cost for someone to actually go there and install the server, however this is definitely the first time I have heard of charging installation fees for OpenVZ VPS, which does not actually need any human intervention in the OS installations at all.
There is slight discount as your billing cycle goes longer, however there is no discount for the setup fee:
The only option for you to choose on this order is the IP address, which is pretty cheap at 1 dollar per IP per month, interesting enough, there is no volume discount on this as well:
CPanel is charged at a pretty standard rate of 15 per month:
I am not sure if it was just because this promotion (many providers tend to set the fraud verification checks to maximum level during promotions, especially the first month free promotion, since it is normally a good way to attract abusers/spammers), but in this case, I received my order confirmation on March 7 at 21:00 and received my VPS set up email on the next day at 12:55pm, which is quite a delay.
The VPS welcome email I have received is also shorter than usual, without any download details for putty and so on. However, the biggest trouble I have found is there is no link to their WHMCS system, and in fact, just to make the matter even worse, I have yet to find a way to navigate to their WHMCS system and the “portal” system they have on their home page is actually leading to the control panel of their dedicated server. I guess Amanah is primarily a dedicated server provider and to them, VPS hosting is more like a “side-business” than anything else.
(And here is the direct link to their WHMCS system, if in case anyone needs it: https://support.amanah.com/clientarea.php)
However, their WHMCS system is actually in secured HTTPS protocol and once entered into the interface, the information of the VPS is shown:
There are only three control buttons and no graphs/charts available in the WHMCS system. However, all three control buttons appear to work, which is something great. For example, after I hit on the reboot button, this is what I see:
There is no addons available for purchase:
In the Management Actions area, besides the three action buttons, there is also a cancellation button that you can use to cancel the service.
The SolusVM control panel is using HTTP protocal (i.e., not secured) on port 5353, and once you log in, a quite standard solusVM interface, note that there are two IP address here and the bandwidth is actually showing 9.77TB, which is kind of usual:
There are actually very limited OS reinstallation options available, in fact, it is probably the provider with the least amount of OS template choice that I have seen, with only three types of OS available, CentOS, Debian and Ubuntu:
Quite surprisingly, the instant rDNS entry is available and seems to work:
Test on the VPS
As mentioned above, the VPS that I have has 512MB of RAM (no burstable), 10GB of hard drive space and unmetered bandwidth (which seems to be a huge selling point of this VPS) and the VPS is located in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
After a fresh reload of the OS, the VPS takes about 19MB of RAM:
free -m total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 512 19 492 0 0 0 -/+ buffers/cache: 19 492 Swap: 0 0 0
Top output showing the processes running:
top - 00:17:12 up 19:33, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 Tasks: 14 total, 1 running, 13 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni,100.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 524288k total, 20568k used, 503720k free, 0k buffers Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 0k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 19707 root 15 0 79000 3548 2820 S 0 0.7 0:00.04 sshd 1356 root 18 0 71108 2680 1276 S 0 0.5 0:00.39 apache2 1360 www-data 18 0 71240 2676 1188 S 0 0.5 0:00.00 apache2 17451 www-data 18 0 71240 2644 1168 S 0 0.5 0:00.00 apache2 3129 root 15 0 58108 2000 536 S 0 0.4 0:02.53 sendmail-mta 19723 root 15 0 17696 1872 1408 S 0 0.4 0:00.00 bash 19929 root 15 0 18932 1252 1012 R 0 0.2 0:00.00 top 3147 root 18 0 49172 1132 588 S 0 0.2 0:00.00 sshd 32737 root 18 0 54560 992 496 S 0 0.2 0:00.00 saslauthd 1669 root 25 0 19328 976 772 S 0 0.2 0:00.00 xinetd 1383 root 15 0 20904 948 724 S 0 0.2 0:00.05 cron 1 root 15 0 8352 828 704 S 0 0.2 0:02.45 init 1326 root 15 0 5976 716 556 S 0 0.1 0:00.03 syslogd 32754 root 18 0 54560 652 156 S 0 0.1 0:00.00 saslauthd
And htop output for the htop fans:
Slightly less than 500MB of hard drive space was used:
df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/simfs 10G 486M 9.6G 5% / tmpfs 256M 0 256M 0% /lib/init/rw tmpfs 256M 0 256M 0% /dev/shm
And the Inodes are set to pretty reasonable values:
df -i Filesystem Inodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted on /dev/simfs 5242880 26200 5216680 1% / tmpfs 65536 4 65532 1% /lib/init/rw tmpfs 65536 1 65535 1% /dev/shm
With the full LNMP stack installed, the memory usage went up to 76MB:
free -m total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 512 76 435 0 0 0 -/+ buffers/cache: 76 435 Swap: 0 0 0
Top output showing the processes running:
top - 05:07:56 up 20:24, 1 user, load average: 0.31, 0.83, 0.88 Tasks: 21 total, 2 running, 19 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni,100.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 524288k total, 78576k used, 445712k free, 0k buffers Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 0k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 15878 www 25 0 50116 20m 452 S 0 4.0 0:00.01 nginx 24183 mysql 19 0 47804 6648 2660 S 0 1.3 0:00.00 mysqld 15828 root 18 0 104m 5580 1300 S 0 1.1 0:00.00 php-cgi 15831 www 18 0 104m 5136 856 S 0 1.0 0:00.00 php-cgi 15832 www 22 0 104m 5136 856 S 0 1.0 0:00.00 php-cgi 15835 www 23 0 104m 5136 856 S 0 1.0 0:00.00 php-cgi 15848 www 24 0 104m 5136 856 S 0 1.0 0:00.00 php-cgi 15849 www 24 0 104m 5136 856 S 0 1.0 0:00.00 php-cgi 19707 root 18 0 79368 3908 2828 R 0 0.7 0:00.90 sshd 3129 root 15 0 58108 2000 536 S 0 0.4 0:02.59 sendmail-mta 19723 root 15 0 17696 1912 1444 S 0 0.4 0:00.00 bash 24066 root 18 0 9136 1376 1112 S 0 0.3 0:00.00 mysqld_safe 17564 root 15 0 18932 1268 1016 R 0 0.2 0:00.00 top 3147 root 18 0 49172 1132 588 S 0 0.2 0:00.00 sshd 32737 root 18 0 54560 992 496 S 0 0.2 0:00.00 saslauthd 1669 root 25 0 19328 976 772 S 0 0.2 0:00.00 xinetd 15877 root 24 0 30104 972 276 S 0 0.2 0:00.00 nginx 1383 root 15 0 20904 948 724 S 0 0.2 0:00.05 cron 1 root 15 0 8352 828 704 S 0 0.2 0:02.49 init 1326 root 18 0 5976 716 556 S 0 0.1 0:00.03 syslogd 32754 root 18 0 54560 652 156 S 0 0.1 0:00.00 saslauthd
And htop output:
About 1.7GB of hard drive space was used in this case:
df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/simfs 10G 1.7G 8.4G 17% / tmpfs 256M 0 256M 0% /lib/init/rw tmpfs 256M 0 256M 0% /dev/shm
And 2% of Inodes values are used:
df -i Filesystem Inodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted on /dev/simfs 5242880 69116 5173764 2% / tmpfs 65536 4 65532 1% /lib/init/rw tmpfs 65536 1 65535 1% /dev/shm
VMStats taken a little while after installing the LNMP stack shows the VPS was mostly idle:
vmstat procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu---- r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa 1 0 0 445872 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 66 0 0 99 0
And uptime results shows 0 usage as well. Note that the last ratio was a lot larger, due to the effect of the LNMP stack installation:
uptime 05:31:50 up 20:48, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.16
There is nothing too strange indicated on the values of beancounters:
cat /proc/user_beancounters Version: 2.5 uid resource held maxheld barrier limit failcnt 182: kmemsize 5050410 5930682 2147483646 2147483646 0 lockedpages 0 0 999999 999999 0 privvmpages 19573 61250 131072 131072 0 shmpages 642 674 131072 131072 0 dummy 0 0 0 0 0 numproc 22 30 999999 999999 0 physpages 10793 57066 0 2147483647 0 vmguarpages 0 0 131072 2147483647 0 oomguarpages 10793 57066 131072 2147483647 0 numtcpsock 7 8 7999992 7999992 0 numflock 4 10 999999 999999 0 numpty 1 2 500000 500000 0 numsiginfo 0 3 999999 999999 0 tcpsndbuf 291264 273760 214748160 396774400 0 tcprcvbuf 114688 7659752 214748160 396774400 0 othersockbuf 11640 30584 214748160 396774400 0 dgramrcvbuf 0 16944 214748160 396774400 0 numothersock 14 18 7999992 7999992 0 dcachesize 233811 260925 2147483646 2147483646 0 numfile 521 955 23999976 23999976 0 dummy 0 0 0 0 0 dummy 0 0 0 0 0 dummy 0 0 0 0 0 numiptent 14 14 999999 999999 0
And vzfree did not indicate any sign of overselling:
vzfree Total Used Free Kernel: 2048.00M 4.83M 2043.17M Allocate: 512.00M 76.44M 435.56M (512M Guaranteed) Commit: 512.00M 46.96M 465.04M (55.1% of Allocated) Swap: 0.00M (0.0% of Committed)
CPUInfo showed that 4 CPU cores were assigned to the VPS and were not throttled, and the model of the CPU is pretty recent as well (E5620):
cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 44 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz stepping : 2 cpu MHz : 2394.057 cache size : 12288 KB physical id : 1 siblings : 8 core id : 0 cpu cores : 4 apicid : 32 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 11 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc ida nonstop_tsc arat pni monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt lahf_lm bogomips : 4788.11 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: [8] processor : 1 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 44 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz stepping : 2 cpu MHz : 2394.057 cache size : 12288 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 8 core id : 0 cpu cores : 4 apicid : 0 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 11 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc ida nonstop_tsc arat pni monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt lahf_lm bogomips : 4788.13 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: [8] processor : 2 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 44 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz stepping : 2 cpu MHz : 2394.057 cache size : 12288 KB physical id : 1 siblings : 8 core id : 1 cpu cores : 4 apicid : 34 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 11 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc ida nonstop_tsc arat pni monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt lahf_lm bogomips : 4788.05 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: [8] processor : 3 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 44 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz stepping : 2 cpu MHz : 2394.057 cache size : 12288 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 8 core id : 1 cpu cores : 4 apicid : 2 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 11 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc ida nonstop_tsc arat pni monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt lahf_lm bogomips : 4788.03 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: [8]
Meminfo shows nothing new:
cat /proc/meminfo MemTotal: 524288 kB MemFree: 445760 kB Buffers: 0 kB Cached: 0 kB SwapCached: 0 kB Active: 0 kB Inactive: 0 kB HighTotal: 0 kB HighFree: 0 kB LowTotal: 524288 kB LowFree: 445760 kB SwapTotal: 0 kB SwapFree: 0 kB Dirty: 66896 kB Writeback: 0 kB AnonPages: 0 kB Mapped: 0 kB Slab: 0 kB PageTables: 0 kB NFS_Unstable: 0 kB Bounce: 0 kB CommitLimit: 0 kB Committed_AS: 0 kB VmallocTotal: 0 kB VmallocUsed: 0 kB VmallocChunk: 0 kB HugePages_Total: 0 HugePages_Free: 0 HugePages_Rsvd: 0 Hugepagesize: 2048 kB
And time sync results, interestingly, seems a bit longer than usual:
time sync real 0m10.250s user 0m0.000s sys 0m0.035s
I am not certain what is the hard drive set up for this particular VPS (does anyone know anyway of getting this information?), however the disk performance is decent but nothing too impressive, which is what we commonly see among the unmetered VPS packages:
dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync 16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 21.2441 s, 50.5 MB/s
Testing again showed slightly worse results:
dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync 16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 23.6103 s, 45.5 MB/s
The ioping results were a little sluggish as well:
ioping -c 10 . 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=1 time=17.9 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=2 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=3 time=0.3 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=4 time=0.3 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=5 time=3.9 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=6 time=1.0 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=7 time=4.0 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=8 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=9 time=0.3 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=10 time=1.0 ms --- . (simfs /dev/simfs) ioping statistics --- 10 requests completed in 9038.4 ms, 345 iops, 1.3 mb/s min/avg/max/mdev = 0.2/2.9/17.9/5.2 ms
Testing again showed similar results:
ioping -c 10 . 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=1 time=19.7 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=2 time=0.3 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=3 time=7.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=4 time=0.3 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=5 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=6 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=7 time=0.3 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=8 time=0.3 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=9 time=1.0 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=10 time=2.0 ms --- . (simfs /dev/simfs) ioping statistics --- 10 requests completed in 9039.9 ms, 319 iops, 1.2 mb/s min/avg/max/mdev = 0.2/3.1/19.7/5.9 ms
The download speed is pretty good, I was be able to get close to the port speed (100mbit) using the Cachefly test download file:
wget cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2012-03-23 05:56:44-- http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net... 205.234.175.175 Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net|205.234.175.175|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream] Saving to: `/dev/null' 100%[=======================================================================================================================================>] 104,857,600 10.9M/s in 9.1s 2012-03-23 05:56:53 (11.0 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
Testing again showed similar results:
wget cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2012-03-23 06:02:29-- http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net... 205.234.175.175 Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net|205.234.175.175|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream] Saving to: `/dev/null' 100%[=======================================================================================================================================>] 104,857,600 10.4M/s in 9.8s 2012-03-23 06:02:39 (10.2 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
The upload tests showed pretty decent speed as well, with my test VPS with Quickweb Chicago, IL, I was able to get close to 7MB/s of upload speed:
wget 38.111.107.35/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2012-03-22 21:57:02-- http://38.111.107.35/100mb.test Connecting to 38.111.107.35:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream] Saving to: `/dev/null' 100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 7.05M/s in 14s 2012-03-22 21:57:16 (6.98 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
With my test VPS with Quickweb Los Angeles, CA, the speed is down slightly, but is still really good:
wget 38.111.107.35/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2012-03-22 17:57:51-- http://38.111.107.35/100mb.test Connecting to 38.111.107.35:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream] Saving to: `/dev/null' 100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 8.92M/s in 15s 2012-03-22 17:58:06 (6.79 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
Finally, with my XenVZ test VPS in Maidenhead, UK, the speed is obviously a litte slower than the VPS in North America, but is nonetheless pretty decent:
wget 38.111.107.35/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2012-03-23 05:56:22-- http://38.111.107.35/100mb.test Connecting to 38.111.107.35:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream] Saving to: `/dev/null' 100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 4.55M/s in 25s 2012-03-23 05:56:47 (4.02 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
I have to say that it is pretty rare to see an unmetered provider with such good network speed, although obviously the price tag would tell half of the story.
Lastly, the benchmarks, quite frankly speaking I was expecting a little more with the VPS with 4 CPU cores, particularly when the cores are not throttled, therefore I was a little disappointed when the VPS only managed to get a little above 1600 points for Unixbench:
# # # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # ## ##### ##### # # # # ###### # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # # #### # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # # Version 5.1.3 Based on the Byte Magazine Unix Benchmark Multi-CPU version Version 5 revisions by Ian Smith, Sunnyvale, CA, USA January 13, 2011 johantheghost at yahoo period com 1 x Dhrystone 2 using register variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Double-Precision Whetstone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Execl Throughput 1 2 3 1 x File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 1 2 3 1 x File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1 2 3 1 x File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1 2 3 1 x Pipe Throughput 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Pipe-based Context Switching 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Process Creation 1 2 3 1 x System Call Overhead 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 1 2 3 1 x Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1 2 3 4 x Dhrystone 2 using register variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Double-Precision Whetstone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Execl Throughput 1 2 3 4 x File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 1 2 3 4 x File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1 2 3 4 x File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1 2 3 4 x Pipe Throughput 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Pipe-based Context Switching 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Process Creation 1 2 3 4 x System Call Overhead 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 1 2 3 4 x Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1 2 3 ======================================================================== BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.3) System: ******: GNU/Linux OS: GNU/Linux -- 2.6.18-194.26.1.el5.028stab079.2 -- #1 SMP Fri Dec 17 19:25:15 MSK 2010 Machine: i686 (i386) Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="UTF-8", collate="UTF-8") CPU 0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz (4788.1 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization CPU 1: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz (4788.1 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization CPU 2: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz (4788.1 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization CPU 3: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz (4788.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization 07:13:59 up 6:05, 1 user, load average: 0.27, 0.29, 0.32; runlevel 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Benchmark Run: Wed Mar 21 2012 07:13:59 - 07:46:48 4 CPUs in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests Dhrystone 2 using register variables 8944267.0 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Double-Precision Whetstone 2144.1 MWIPS (9.8 s, 7 samples) Execl Throughput 3057.0 lps (29.9 s, 2 samples) File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 391667.6 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 97849.1 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 911848.1 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Pipe Throughput 685394.1 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Pipe-based Context Switching 8157.5 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Process Creation 10973.3 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 4016.4 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1102.2 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) System Call Overhead 588452.7 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 8944267.0 766.4 Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 2144.1 389.8 Execl Throughput 43.0 3057.0 710.9 File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 391667.6 989.1 File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 97849.1 591.2 File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 911848.1 1572.2 Pipe Throughput 12440.0 685394.1 551.0 Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 8157.5 20.4 Process Creation 126.0 10973.3 870.9 Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 4016.4 947.3 Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 1102.2 1836.9 System Call Overhead 15000.0 588452.7 392.3 ======== System Benchmarks Index Score 574.9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Benchmark Run: Wed Mar 21 2012 07:46:48 - 08:21:43 4 CPUs in system; running 4 parallel copies of tests Dhrystone 2 using register variables 31087768.3 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Double-Precision Whetstone 8045.2 MWIPS (10.6 s, 7 samples) Execl Throughput 6795.3 lps (29.5 s, 2 samples) File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 359970.4 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 103726.2 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1071710.5 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Pipe Throughput 2433510.9 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Pipe-based Context Switching 789913.9 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Process Creation 28541.3 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 8265.8 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1566.5 lpm (60.1 s, 2 samples) System Call Overhead 1981141.6 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 31087768.3 2663.9 Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 8045.2 1462.8 Execl Throughput 43.0 6795.3 1580.3 File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 359970.4 909.0 File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 103726.2 626.7 File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 1071710.5 1847.8 Pipe Throughput 12440.0 2433510.9 1956.2 Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 789913.9 1974.8 Process Creation 126.0 28541.3 2265.2 Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 8265.8 1949.5 Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 1566.5 2610.9 System Call Overhead 15000.0 1981141.6 1320.8 ======== System Benchmarks Index Score 1641.0
Testing again showed slightly better results, but is more or less in the same range:
# # # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # ## ##### ##### # # # # ###### # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # # #### # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # # Version 5.1.3 Based on the Byte Magazine Unix Benchmark Multi-CPU version Version 5 revisions by Ian Smith, Sunnyvale, CA, USA January 13, 2011 johantheghost at yahoo period com 1 x Dhrystone 2 using register variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Double-Precision Whetstone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Execl Throughput 1 2 3 1 x File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 1 2 3 1 x File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1 2 3 1 x File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1 2 3 1 x Pipe Throughput 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Pipe-based Context Switching 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Process Creation 1 2 3 1 x System Call Overhead 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 x Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 1 2 3 1 x Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1 2 3 4 x Dhrystone 2 using register variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Double-Precision Whetstone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Execl Throughput 1 2 3 4 x File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 1 2 3 4 x File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1 2 3 4 x File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1 2 3 4 x Pipe Throughput 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Pipe-based Context Switching 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Process Creation 1 2 3 4 x System Call Overhead 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 x Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 1 2 3 4 x Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1 2 3 ======================================================================== BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.3) System: ******: GNU/Linux OS: GNU/Linux -- 2.6.18-194.26.1.el5.028stab079.2 -- #1 SMP Fri Dec 17 19:25:15 MSK 2010 Machine: i686 (i386) Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="UTF-8", collate="UTF-8") CPU 0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz (4788.1 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization CPU 1: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz (4788.1 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization CPU 2: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz (4788.1 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization CPU 3: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz (4788.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization 08:36:01 up 7:27, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.71, 2.75; runlevel 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Benchmark Run: Wed Mar 21 2012 08:36:01 - 09:08:06 4 CPUs in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests Dhrystone 2 using register variables 8951504.6 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Double-Precision Whetstone 2129.6 MWIPS (10.0 s, 7 samples) Execl Throughput 3106.9 lps (29.7 s, 2 samples) File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 383671.8 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 100486.7 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 920903.1 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Pipe Throughput 684670.2 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Pipe-based Context Switching 21088.9 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Process Creation 10787.9 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 4148.7 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1192.4 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) System Call Overhead 596846.6 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 8951504.6 767.1 Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 2129.6 387.2 Execl Throughput 43.0 3106.9 722.5 File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 383671.8 968.9 File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 100486.7 607.2 File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 920903.1 1587.8 Pipe Throughput 12440.0 684670.2 550.4 Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 21088.9 52.7 Process Creation 126.0 10787.9 856.2 Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 4148.7 978.5 Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 1192.4 1987.4 System Call Overhead 15000.0 596846.6 397.9 ======== System Benchmarks Index Score 629.2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Benchmark Run: Wed Mar 21 2012 09:08:06 - 09:43:48 4 CPUs in system; running 4 parallel copies of tests Dhrystone 2 using register variables 33639149.5 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Double-Precision Whetstone 7853.4 MWIPS (9.5 s, 7 samples) Execl Throughput 6941.5 lps (29.7 s, 2 samples) File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 423369.2 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 124642.7 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 880023.9 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Pipe Throughput 2393055.4 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Pipe-based Context Switching 810612.7 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Process Creation 28947.6 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 8793.0 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1542.0 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) System Call Overhead 2003281.4 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 33639149.5 2882.5 Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 7853.4 1427.9 Execl Throughput 43.0 6941.5 1614.3 File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 423369.2 1069.1 File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 124642.7 753.1 File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 880023.9 1517.3 Pipe Throughput 12440.0 2393055.4 1923.7 Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 810612.7 2026.5 Process Creation 126.0 28947.6 2297.4 Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 8793.0 2073.8 Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 1542.0 2569.9 System Call Overhead 15000.0 2003281.4 1335.5 ======== System Benchmarks Index Score 1683.3
Geekbench results gives a little better score with this:
System Information Platform: Linux x86 (32-bit) Compiler: GCC 4.1.2 20070925 (Red Hat 4.1.2-33) Operating System: Linux 2.6.18-194.26.1.el5.028stab079.2 i686 Model: Linux PC (Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz) Motherboard: Unknown Motherboard Processor: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz Processor ID: GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 44 Stepping 2 Logical Processors: 4 Physical Processors: 2 Processor Frequency: 2.39 GHz L1 Instruction Cache: 0.00 B L1 Data Cache: 0.00 B L2 Cache: 256 KB L3 Cache: 0.00 B Bus Frequency: 0.00 Hz Memory: 23.5 GB Memory Type: N/A SIMD: 1 BIOS: N/A Processor Model: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz Processor Cores: 4 Integer Blowfish single-threaded scalar 1719 |||||| multi-threaded scalar 6887 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Text Compress single-threaded scalar 1749 |||||| multi-threaded scalar 6037 |||||||||||||||||||||||| Text Decompress single-threaded scalar 2014 |||||||| multi-threaded scalar 7341 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Image Compress single-threaded scalar 1672 |||||| multi-threaded scalar 4430 ||||||||||||||||| Image Decompress single-threaded scalar 1630 |||||| multi-threaded scalar 4579 |||||||||||||||||| Lua single-threaded scalar 3136 |||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 8343 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Floating Point Mandelbrot single-threaded scalar 2111 |||||||| multi-threaded scalar 7223 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Dot Product single-threaded scalar 3451 ||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 8862 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| single-threaded vector 4116 |||||||||||||||| multi-threaded vector 10092 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| LU Decomposition single-threaded scalar 1696 |||||| multi-threaded scalar 3034 |||||||||||| Primality Test single-threaded scalar 3541 |||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 8810 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Sharpen Image single-threaded scalar 4369 ||||||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 14046 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Blur Image single-threaded scalar 5410 ||||||||||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 13904 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Memory Read Sequential single-threaded scalar 4928 ||||||||||||||||||| Write Sequential single-threaded scalar 6956 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Stdlib Allocate single-threaded scalar 3590 |||||||||||||| Stdlib Write single-threaded scalar 3423 ||||||||||||| Stdlib Copy single-threaded scalar 6649 |||||||||||||||||||||||||| Stream Stream Copy single-threaded scalar 6115 |||||||||||||||||||||||| single-threaded vector 9443 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Stream Scale single-threaded scalar 4538 |||||||||||||||||| single-threaded vector 7235 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Stream Add single-threaded scalar 5186 |||||||||||||||||||| single-threaded vector 5975 ||||||||||||||||||||||| Stream Triad single-threaded scalar 3425 ||||||||||||| single-threaded vector 5402 ||||||||||||||||||||| Integer Score: 4128 |||||||||||||||| Floating Point Score: 6476 ||||||||||||||||||||||||| Memory Score: 5109 |||||||||||||||||||| Stream Score: 5914 ||||||||||||||||||||||| Overall Geekbench Score: 5324 |||||||||||||||||||||
Testing again showed slightly worse results:
System Information Platform: Linux x86 (32-bit) Compiler: GCC 4.1.2 20070925 (Red Hat 4.1.2-33) Operating System: Linux 2.6.18-194.26.1.el5.028stab079.2 i686 Model: Linux PC (Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz) Motherboard: Unknown Motherboard Processor: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz Processor ID: GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 44 Stepping 2 Logical Processors: 4 Physical Processors: 2 Processor Frequency: 2.39 GHz L1 Instruction Cache: 0.00 B L1 Data Cache: 0.00 B L2 Cache: 256 KB L3 Cache: 0.00 B Bus Frequency: 0.00 Hz Memory: 23.5 GB Memory Type: N/A SIMD: 1 BIOS: N/A Processor Model: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz Processor Cores: 4 Integer Blowfish single-threaded scalar 1751 ||||||| multi-threaded scalar 6894 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Text Compress single-threaded scalar 1653 |||||| multi-threaded scalar 6022 |||||||||||||||||||||||| Text Decompress single-threaded scalar 2024 |||||||| multi-threaded scalar 6479 ||||||||||||||||||||||||| Image Compress single-threaded scalar 1675 |||||| multi-threaded scalar 4740 |||||||||||||||||| Image Decompress single-threaded scalar 1560 |||||| multi-threaded scalar 4654 |||||||||||||||||| Lua single-threaded scalar 3150 |||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 8363 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Floating Point Mandelbrot single-threaded scalar 1522 |||||| multi-threaded scalar 4915 ||||||||||||||||||| Dot Product single-threaded scalar 3426 ||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 9411 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| single-threaded vector 3135 |||||||||||| multi-threaded vector 10356 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| LU Decomposition single-threaded scalar 1552 |||||| multi-threaded scalar 5274 ||||||||||||||||||||| Primality Test single-threaded scalar 3494 ||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 8777 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Sharpen Image single-threaded scalar 4988 ||||||||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 12806 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Blur Image single-threaded scalar 5430 ||||||||||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 13740 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Memory Read Sequential single-threaded scalar 4175 |||||||||||||||| Write Sequential single-threaded scalar 5693 |||||||||||||||||||||| Stdlib Allocate single-threaded scalar 2692 |||||||||| Stdlib Write single-threaded scalar 3171 |||||||||||| Stdlib Copy single-threaded scalar 5881 ||||||||||||||||||||||| Stream Stream Copy single-threaded scalar 5655 |||||||||||||||||||||| single-threaded vector 6822 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Stream Scale single-threaded scalar 2710 |||||||||| single-threaded vector 7855 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Stream Add single-threaded scalar 5271 ||||||||||||||||||||| single-threaded vector 7576 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Stream Triad single-threaded scalar 4035 |||||||||||||||| single-threaded vector 4327 ||||||||||||||||| Integer Score: 4080 |||||||||||||||| Floating Point Score: 6344 ||||||||||||||||||||||||| Memory Score: 4322 ||||||||||||||||| Stream Score: 5531 |||||||||||||||||||||| Overall Geekbench Score: 5065 ||||||||||||||||||||
Overall, I can definitely see the unmetered bandwidth, together with fast upload/download speed, is definitely a huge selling point, which would kind of justify the price tag on the VPS.
Customer Service and Support
I guess Amanah was probably quite confident with the performance and stability of their system that they seems to be a little slow in responding to tickets. I have sent a ticket to them on March 22 at 18:10 asking about RAID configuration for the hardware node hosting this VPS (RAID 1 is the answer by the way), and the ticket was not responded the next day at 10:53. Granted it is not something important, however I was hoping for at least slightly faster response than a 14 hour wait on weekdays. UPDATE: Amanah offers 8am-5pm support for non-emergency issues, as per this page so this is reasonable.
Conclusion
I guess the VPS providers always face the dilemma of picking one of the three: stability, performance and cheap price. I think from this perspective, Amanah definitely picked stability. The price that they have charged for a VPS with 512MB of RAM is not exactly cheap, and quite frankly speaking even the performance, as indicated by disk I/O and benchmarks, are not that great. However, the good network speed, together with the unmetered bandwidth as well as the overall stability of the VPS, makes this VPS a pretty good choice for people who are interested in getting a VPs mainly for download/upload purposes in Canada, and obviously, who has a pretty deep pocket for the VPS, in the LEB standard at least.
UPDATE: I have just noticed my free VPS with Amanah was terminated this morning, the day after I posted this review, so if you would like to keep your free VPS with them, please make sure you do not post anything negative about the company.
I’m a VPN provider and I needed servers for US and Canadian customers. I tried Amanah for the first time. I found their support to be really helpful and knowledgeable. They were very professional when handling complaints. As right now, I can easily stay here for 5 years or more.
@Marcos: Thanks for sharing your feedback, may I know are you a dedicated server user or a VPS user of Amanah?
Amanah hosting provider is perfect for streaming music and video. The servers were stable, the uptime was flawless (so far), speed was good and the bandwidth was more than I needed. 10/10 (so far).
@Michael Thanks a lot for sharing your experience, unfortunately they have stopped offering the free VPS service, hopefully they’ll be able to have good business with the high end customers!