96MB Low End VPS Review Part 66–EaseVPS
Sometimes, I felt that VPS business is a combination of experience and skills and perhaps even more importantly, luck. I have to say that on the front-end of luck, EaseVPS probably has a rocky start compared to many other providers, such as DDOS Attacks, fake service down alerts and inevitably some unhappy customers. However, now they have been in business longer, has anything improved? Let’s take a look together.
Basic Information and Sign Up
The plan I have signed up was a year ago, on this post on LowEndTalk, and the “Small” VPS plan is now replaced by the following:
However the price could be brought down to 7 USD per month as per the posting on LowEndBox here.
The plan that I have had comes with the following resources:
The sign up is a standard WHMCS interface with no SSL, and seems to be hosted on a separate domain at easevps.eu:
As you can see, there are a few options available – location, number of extra IPv4 addresses, OS and management option. For the location, there are three locations available, with one UK location and two US locations. I believe Jacob, the owner of EaseVPS, is based in UK, and it is their first DC as well:
Extra IPv4 address (there is one included in the plan) cost 2 USD per month each, with no volume discount of any sort:
For OS selection, there are quite a few options available in the drop down list, this basically covers the latest versions (or the two latest versions) of all major Linux distributions. However they are just the base templates with no “turnkey” version available:
CentOS 5 32Bit CentOS 5 64Bit CentOS 6 32Bit CentOS 6 64Bit Debain 5 32Bit Debain 5 64Bit Debain 6 32Bit Debain 6 64Bit Fedora 13 32Bit Fedora 13 64Bit Suse 11.4 32Bit Suse 11.4 64Bit Ubuntu 10.04 32Bit Ubuntu 10.04 64Bit Ubuntu 11.04 32Bit Ubuntu 11.04 64Bit Ubuntu 12.04 32Bit Ubuntu 12.04 64Bit Ubuntu 12.10 32Bit Ubuntu 12.10 64Bit
You can also purchase VPS management for an extra 15 USD per month:
Provision of the VPS was instant and I was able to receive the new server information email the same time as my payment confirmation email. The root password was in plain text and there are two control panel logins, one using SSL and one does not. Interestingly, the link to the SSL site automatically forwarded to the non-SSL site, which essentially rendered the SSL link useless.
Once logged in, a pretty standard standard SolusVM interface was shown:
The OS templates that are available for reinstallation is pretty much the same as what was shown on the WHCMS interface, and includes some standard templates for the latest version of major OS distributions:
There are two central backup slots available, which is pretty good considering most the providers only enable the offsite FTP backups:
Instant rDNS is not available, as EaseVPS does not own the IP block:
Test on the VPS
As mentioned above, the VPS has 1GB of RAM and 1GB of vSwap, 60GB of hard drive space and 1TB of bandwidth, it is located at Wholesale Internet at Kansas City and I have installed Debian 6 32 bit template for testing purposes.
Initially, when I was about to log into the VPS, I was unable to log in nor ping the VPS:
ping 198.204.xxx.xxx PING 198.204.xxx.xxx (198.204.xxx.xxx) 56(84) bytes of data. ^C --- 198.204.xxx.xxx ping statistics --- 10 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 8999ms
However, when I used the recovery console in SolusVM, I was able to log in to the VPS:
please wait... successfully logged in. entered into CT 13xx
Even though I can see the SSH port was open:
netstat -ln Active Internet connections (only servers) Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:80 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:22 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:25 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:587 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN tcp6 0 0 :::22 :::* LISTEN Active UNIX domain sockets (only servers) Proto RefCnt Flags Type State I-Node Path unix 2 [ ACC ] STREAM LISTENING 105998 /var/run/saslauthd/mux unix 2 [ ACC ] STREAM LISTENING 110571 /var/run/sendmail/mta/smcontrol
And the IP address was properly configured:
ifconfig lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:8 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:8 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:400 (400.0 B) TX bytes:400 (400.0 B) venet0 Link encap:UNSPEC HWaddr 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00 inet addr:127.0.0.2 P-t-P:127.0.0.2 Bcast:0.0.0.0 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP BROADCAST POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:64 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1023 errors:0 dropped:2 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:3412 (3.3 KiB) TX bytes:53506 (52.2 KiB) venet0:0 Link encap:UNSPEC HWaddr 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00 inet addr:198.204.xxx.xxx P-t-P:198.204.xxx.xxx Bcast:0.0.0.0 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP BROADCAST POI
A reboot eventually took care of the issue, however I never quite figured out the cause of the problem.
Once the VPS was back online, tests could be carried out properly. When the OS was initially loaded, about 9MB of RAM was used, which is close to that of the standard OpenVZ Debian 6 32 bit template:
free -m total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 1024 33 990 0 0 23 -/+ buffers/cache: 9 1014 Swap: 1024 0 1024
Top showing the processes running:
top - 03:00:57 up 6 days, 3:34, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 Tasks: 20 total, 1 running, 19 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.0%us, 0.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 1048576k total, 34864k used, 1013712k free, 0k buffers Swap: 1048576k total, 0k used, 1048576k free, 24624k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 23420 root 20 0 8692 3044 2472 S 0 0.3 0:00.11 sshd 470 root 20 0 5240 2736 1460 S 0 0.3 0:20.87 apache2 23444 smmsp 20 0 8216 2400 1688 S 0 0.2 0:00.00 sendmail-msp 18512 www-data 20 0 5240 2384 1068 S 0 0.2 0:00.00 apache2 19853 www-data 20 0 5240 2376 1068 S 0 0.2 0:00.00 apache2 567 root 20 0 9992 1944 816 S 0 0.2 0:21.19 sendmail-mta 23470 root 20 0 2960 1612 1296 S 0 0.2 0:00.01 bash 23429 smmsp 20 0 2940 1480 1008 S 0 0.1 0:00.00 sendmail 23427 root 20 0 2832 1112 848 S 0 0.1 0:00.00 cron 23501 root 20 0 2328 1084 876 R 0 0.1 0:00.00 top 23428 smmsp 20 0 2616 1060 920 S 0 0.1 0:00.00 sh 533 root 20 0 5488 968 580 S 0 0.1 0:03.00 sshd 541 root 20 0 2288 852 668 S 0 0.1 0:00.68 cron 529 root 20 0 2392 840 672 S 0 0.1 0:00.00 xinetd 454 root 20 0 8668 784 448 S 0 0.1 0:00.00 saslauthd 1 root 20 0 2028 684 588 S 0 0.1 0:06.05 init 435 root 20 0 1736 632 508 S 0 0.1 0:03.00 syslogd 455 root 20 0 8668 384 48 S 0 0.0 0:00.00 saslauthd 2 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.00 kthreadd/1302 3 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.00 khelper/1302
And htop output:
About 440MB of hard drive space was used:
df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/simfs 60G 445M 60G 1% / tmpfs 512M 0 512M 0% /lib/init/rw tmpfs 512M 0 512M 0% /dev/shm
The Inode was set to a pretty standard level:
df -i Filesystem Inodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted on /dev/simfs 31457280 26183 31431097 1% / tmpfs 131072 4 131068 1% /lib/init/rw tmpfs 131072 1 131071 1% /dev/shm
Once the LNMP stack was loaded, RAM usage went up to slightly above 100MB:
free -m total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 1024 839 184 0 0 737 -/+ buffers/cache: 101 922 Swap: 1024 1 1022
Top showing the LNMP stack running:
top - 08:19:51 up 6 days, 4:53, 1 user, load average: 0.06, 0.58, 0.66 Tasks: 20 total, 1 running, 19 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.0%us, 0.2%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.8%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 1048576k total, 860204k used, 188372k free, 0k buffers Swap: 1048576k total, 1648k used, 1046928k free, 755624k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 3174 www 20 0 15644 10m 444 S 0 1.1 0:00.00 nginx 3161 mysql 20 0 34444 5088 2448 S 0 0.5 0:00.02 mysqld 26385 root 20 0 17412 3072 2424 S 0 0.3 0:00.02 smbd 23420 root 20 0 8692 1716 1380 S 0 0.2 0:02.36 sshd 26383 root 20 0 9588 1560 1184 S 0 0.1 0:00.02 nmbd 3058 root 20 0 2756 1248 1032 S 0 0.1 0:00.02 mysqld_safe 24956 root 20 0 10036 1212 568 S 0 0.1 0:00.07 sendmail-mta 26396 root 20 0 17460 1132 484 S 0 0.1 0:00.00 smbd 3200 root 20 0 2412 1120 908 R 0 0.1 0:00.00 top 23470 root 20 0 2960 1076 928 S 0 0.1 0:00.03 bash 26685 root 20 0 2344 916 728 S 0 0.1 0:00.00 cron 3173 root 20 0 5432 756 276 S 0 0.1 0:00.00 nginx 1 root 20 0 2068 680 588 S 0 0.1 0:06.11 init 26357 root 20 0 2436 660 656 S 0 0.1 0:00.00 xinetd 435 root 20 0 1736 512 400 S 0 0.0 0:03.12 syslogd 533 root 20 0 5488 496 456 S 0 0.0 0:03.18 sshd 454 root 20 0 8668 324 324 S 0 0.0 0:00.00 saslauthd 455 root 20 0 8668 32 32 S 0 0.0 0:00.00 saslauthd 2 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.00 kthreadd/1302 3 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.00 khelper/1302
And htop output:
About 1.8GB of hard drive space was used:
df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/simfs 60G 1.8G 59G 3% / tmpfs 512M 0 512M 0% /lib/init/rw tmpfs 512M 0 512M 0% /dev/shm
And very little Inode was used:
df -i Filesystem Inodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted on /dev/simfs 31457280 69641 31387639 1% / tmpfs 131072 4 131068 1% /lib/init/rw tmpfs 131072 1 131071 1% /dev/shm
The uptime I have recorded was more than 32 days prior to the reboot, which was good:
uptime 05:21:55 up 32 days, 1:55, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
VMStat showed the VPS was mostly idle with no iowait:
vmstat procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu---- r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa 0 0 1196 954192 0 64148 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 100 0
Beancounters also give zero failure count, which is a good sign:
cat /proc/user_beancounters Version: 2.5 uid resource held maxheld barrier limit failcnt 1302: kmemsize 13107407 90800128 536870912 536870912 0 lockedpages 0 0 131072 131072 0 privvmpages 12629 42023 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 shmpages 641 3361 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 dummy 0 0 0 0 0 numproc 21 48 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 physpages 23588 262113 0 262144 0 vmguarpages 0 0 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 oomguarpages 4626 14614 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 numtcpsock 11 22 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 numflock 18 26 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 numpty 1 6 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 numsiginfo 0 15 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 tcpsndbuf 191840 416512 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 tcprcvbuf 180224 4081232 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 othersockbuf 32368 109296 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 dgramrcvbuf 0 25760 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 numothersock 43 77 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 dcachesize 11057807 87983451 268435456 268435456 0 numfile 409 815 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 dummy 0 0 0 0 0 dummy 0 0 0 0 0 dummy 0 0 0 0 0 numiptent 25 25 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0
And the vzfree output:
vzfree Total Used Free Kernel: 512.00M 12.98M 499.02M Allocate: 36028797018963968.00M 49.34M 36028797018963920.00M (36028797018963967M Guaranteed) Commit: 36028797018963968.00M 31.07M 36028797018963936.00M (36.7% of Allocated) Swap: -94.87M (-524.6% of Committed)
CPUInfo shows there are four cores available, which are AMD Phenom x4 970 processor, this is a relatively old processor (about three years old) but is nontheless pretty decent:
cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : AuthenticAMD cpu family : 16 model : 4 model name : AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor stepping : 3 cpu MHz : 800.000 cache size : 512 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 4 core id : 0 cpu cores : 4 apicid : 0 initial apicid : 0 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 5 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow constant_tsc rep_good nonstop_tsc extd_apicid pni monitor cx16 popcnt lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs skinit wdt npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save bogomips : 7001.03 TLB size : 1024 4K pages clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 48 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: ts ttp tm stc 100mhzsteps hwpstate processor : 1 vendor_id : AuthenticAMD cpu family : 16 model : 4 model name : AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor stepping : 3 cpu MHz : 800.000 cache size : 512 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 4 core id : 1 cpu cores : 4 apicid : 1 initial apicid : 1 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 5 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow constant_tsc rep_good nonstop_tsc extd_apicid pni monitor cx16 popcnt lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs skinit wdt npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save bogomips : 7001.03 TLB size : 1024 4K pages clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 48 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: ts ttp tm stc 100mhzsteps hwpstate processor : 2 vendor_id : AuthenticAMD cpu family : 16 model : 4 model name : AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor stepping : 3 cpu MHz : 800.000 cache size : 512 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 4 core id : 2 cpu cores : 4 apicid : 2 initial apicid : 2 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 5 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow constant_tsc rep_good nonstop_tsc extd_apicid pni monitor cx16 popcnt lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs skinit wdt npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save bogomips : 7001.03 TLB size : 1024 4K pages clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 48 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: ts ttp tm stc 100mhzsteps hwpstate processor : 3 vendor_id : AuthenticAMD cpu family : 16 model : 4 model name : AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor stepping : 3 cpu MHz : 3500.000 cache size : 512 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 4 core id : 3 cpu cores : 4 apicid : 3 initial apicid : 3 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 5 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow constant_tsc rep_good nonstop_tsc extd_apicid pni monitor cx16 popcnt lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs skinit wdt npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save bogomips : 7001.03 TLB size : 1024 4K pages clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 48 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: ts ttp tm stc 100mhzsteps hwpstate
The meminfo output showed nothing too surprising:
cat /proc/meminfo MemTotal: 1048576 kB MemFree: 922624 kB Cached: 96368 kB Active: 7340 kB Inactive: 105736 kB Active(anon): 4272 kB Inactive(anon): 12436 kB Active(file): 3068 kB Inactive(file): 93300 kB Unevictable: 0 kB Mlocked: 0 kB SwapTotal: 1048576 kB SwapFree: 1046776 kB Dirty: 0 kB Writeback: 0 kB AnonPages: 16708 kB Shmem: 2564 kB Slab: 12836 kB SReclaimable: 10824 kB SUnreclaim: 2012 kB
And the time sync output:
time sync real 0m0.025s user 0m0.001s sys 0m0.001s
Disk I/O speed is probably right above the average:
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, 14.8778 s, 72.2 MB/s
Testing again showed slightly better 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, 11.9806 s, 89.6 MB/s
However the ioping results were much less promising:
ioping -c 10 . 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=1 time=0.7 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=2 time=20.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=3 time=14.1 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=4 time=0.7 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=5 time=0.7 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=6 time=95.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=7 time=51.7 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=8 time=57.7 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=9 time=13.7 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=10 time=18.9 ms --- . (simfs /vz/private/1302) ioping statistics --- 10 requests completed in 9275.1 ms, 37 iops, 0.1 mb/s min/avg/max/mdev = 0.7/27.4/95.2/29.6 ms
As you can see, the IO ping results are very unstable, indicating that the disk is probably heavily oversold.
Testing again did not yield any better results:
ioping -c 10 . 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=1 time=0.3 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=2 time=29.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=3 time=0.7 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=4 time=390.8 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=5 time=0.8 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=6 time=0.6 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=7 time=0.8 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=8 time=0.7 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=9 time=0.7 ms 4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/1302): request=10 time=16.2 ms --- . (simfs /vz/private/1302) ioping statistics --- 10 requests completed in 9442.2 ms, 23 iops, 0.1 mb/s min/avg/max/mdev = 0.3/44.1/390.8/116.0 ms
Although EaseVPS advertise 100mbit connection by default (which can be raised to 1Gbit with a ticket), the download speed from Cachefly tend to say otherwise:
wget cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2013-06-02 05:25:18-- http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net (cachefly.cachefly.net)... 205.234.175.175 Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net (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 1.29M/s in 76s 2013-06-02 05:26:34 (1.32 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
As you can see, the speed appears more likely to be for a 10mbit port rather than 100mbit.
Testing again does not show much better results:
wget cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2013-06-02 05:28:49-- http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net (cachefly.cachefly.net)... 205.234.175.175 Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net (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 1.37M/s in 77s 2013-06-02 05:30:06 (1.30 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
The upload speed, surprisingly, is a lot better, first is the upload speed with my Quickweb test VPS in Chicago, IL:
wget 198.204.xxx.xxx/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2013-06-02 00:34:28-- http://198.204.xxx.xxx/100mb.test Connecting to 198.204.xxx.xxx:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream] Saving to: `/dev/null' 100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 7.93M/s in 13s 2013-06-02 00:34:41 (7.86 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
As you can see, the upload speed is quite close to the 100mbit port speed.
Next with my test VPS with ChicagoVPS at Los Angeles, CA:
wget 198.204.xxx.xxx/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2013-06-02 08:36:27-- http://198.204.xxx.xxx/100mb.test Connecting to 198.204.xxx.xxx:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream] Saving to: `/dev/null' 100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 1.50M/s in 71s 2013-06-02 08:37:39 (1.40 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
And finally with the Prometeus test VPS from Milan, Italy:
wget 198.204.xxx.xxx/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2013-06-02 04:37:45-- http://198.204.xxx.xxx/100mb.test Connecting to 198.204.xxx.xxx:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream] Saving to: a€?/dev/nulla€ 100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 10.7M/s in 13s
For some reason the test results from Prometeus was actually the best among all, which is a little surprising.
For the benchmarking, as usual both UnixBench and Geekbench were used, first are the Unixbench score:
# # # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # ## ##### ##### # # # # ###### # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # # #### # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # # 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: xxxxxx: GNU/Linux OS: GNU/Linux -- 2.6.32-042stab076.5 -- #1 SMP Mon Mar 18 20:41:34 MSK 2013 Machine: i686 (unknown) Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="ANSI_X3.4-1968", collate="ANSI_X3.4-1968") CPU 0: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor (7001.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, AMD MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, AMD virtualization, SYSCALL/SYSRET CPU 1: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor (7001.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, AMD MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, AMD virtualization, SYSCALL/SYSRET CPU 2: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor (7001.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, AMD MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, AMD virtualization, SYSCALL/SYSRET CPU 3: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor (7001.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, AMD MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, AMD virtualization, SYSCALL/SYSRET 05:31:58 up 32 days, 2:05, 1 user, load average: 0.01, 0.04, 0.00; runlevel 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Benchmark Run: Sun Jun 02 2013 05:31:58 - 06:00:05 4 CPUs in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests Dhrystone 2 using register variables 15878857.0 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Double-Precision Whetstone 3710.0 MWIPS (10.0 s, 7 samples) Execl Throughput 1952.5 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 604887.9 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 219088.0 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1105469.6 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Pipe Throughput 1616009.9 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Pipe-based Context Switching 61210.5 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Process Creation 7203.2 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 3306.2 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1922.3 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) System Call Overhead 1490689.8 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 15878857.0 1360.7 Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 3710.0 674.5 Execl Throughput 43.0 1952.5 454.1 File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 604887.9 1527.5 File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 219088.0 1323.8 File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 1105469.6 1906.0 Pipe Throughput 12440.0 1616009.9 1299.0 Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 61210.5 153.0 Process Creation 126.0 7203.2 571.7 Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 3306.2 779.8 Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 1922.3 3203.8 System Call Overhead 15000.0 1490689.8 993.8 ======== System Benchmarks Index Score 936.2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Benchmark Run: Sun Jun 02 2013 06:00:05 - 06:29:11 4 CPUs in system; running 4 parallel copies of tests Dhrystone 2 using register variables 47525212.9 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Double-Precision Whetstone 14828.6 MWIPS (10.0 s, 7 samples) Execl Throughput 15209.9 lps (29.9 s, 2 samples) File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 609476.3 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 180441.1 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1345843.8 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Pipe Throughput 4821951.8 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Pipe-based Context Switching 777374.2 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Process Creation 33662.0 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 15752.7 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 2099.8 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) System Call Overhead 3002160.1 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 47525212.9 4072.4 Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 14828.6 2696.1 Execl Throughput 43.0 15209.9 3537.2 File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 609476.3 1539.1 File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 180441.1 1090.3 File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 1345843.8 2320.4 Pipe Throughput 12440.0 4821951.8 3876.2 Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 777374.2 1943.4 Process Creation 126.0 33662.0 2671.6 Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 15752.7 3715.3 Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 2099.8 3499.7 System Call Overhead 15000.0 3002160.1 2001.4 ======== System Benchmarks Index Score 2559.9
The single core results is more than 900 points, which is actually pretty impressive. The four core CPU benchmark is close to 2600 points, which is pretty good as well.
Testing for the second time yielded similar results:
# # # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # ## ##### ##### # # # # ###### # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # # #### # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # # 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: xxxxxx: GNU/Linux OS: GNU/Linux -- 2.6.32-042stab076.5 -- #1 SMP Mon Mar 18 20:41:34 MSK 2013 Machine: i686 (unknown) Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="ANSI_X3.4-1968", collate="ANSI_X3.4-1968") CPU 0: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor (7001.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, AMD MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, AMD virtualization, SYSCALL/SYSRET CPU 1: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor (7001.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, AMD MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, AMD virtualization, SYSCALL/SYSRET CPU 2: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor (7001.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, AMD MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, AMD virtualization, SYSCALL/SYSRET CPU 3: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor (7001.0 bogomips) Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, AMD MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, AMD virtualization, SYSCALL/SYSRET 07:19:37 up 32 days, 3:53, 1 user, load average: 0.06, 0.12, 0.29; runlevel 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Benchmark Run: Sun Jun 02 2013 07:19:37 - 07:47:45 4 CPUs in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests Dhrystone 2 using register variables 15382892.9 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Double-Precision Whetstone 3697.1 MWIPS (10.0 s, 7 samples) Execl Throughput 2052.6 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 568968.8 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 211331.0 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1080807.6 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Pipe Throughput 1589527.4 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Pipe-based Context Switching 65916.8 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Process Creation 7210.9 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 3663.3 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1203.5 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) System Call Overhead 1472306.1 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 15382892.9 1318.2 Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 3697.1 672.2 Execl Throughput 43.0 2052.6 477.3 File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 568968.8 1436.8 File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 211331.0 1276.9 File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 1080807.6 1863.5 Pipe Throughput 12440.0 1589527.4 1277.8 Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 65916.8 164.8 Process Creation 126.0 7210.9 572.3 Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 3663.3 864.0 Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 1203.5 2005.8 System Call Overhead 15000.0 1472306.1 981.5 ======== System Benchmarks Index Score 903.6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Benchmark Run: Sun Jun 02 2013 07:47:45 - 08:16:49 4 CPUs in system; running 4 parallel copies of tests Dhrystone 2 using register variables 45798244.0 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Double-Precision Whetstone 14827.0 MWIPS (10.0 s, 7 samples) Execl Throughput 14869.1 lps (29.8 s, 2 samples) File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 594342.9 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 180175.0 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1306050.0 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Pipe Throughput 4792327.7 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Pipe-based Context Switching 755221.3 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Process Creation 31611.8 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 15931.7 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 2093.9 lpm (60.1 s, 2 samples) System Call Overhead 3017099.1 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 45798244.0 3924.4 Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 14827.0 2695.8 Execl Throughput 43.0 14869.1 3457.9 File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 594342.9 1500.9 File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 180175.0 1088.7 File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 1306050.0 2251.8 Pipe Throughput 12440.0 4792327.7 3852.4 Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 755221.3 1888.1 Process Creation 126.0 31611.8 2508.9 Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 15931.7 3757.5 Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 2093.9 3489.8 System Call Overhead 15000.0 3017099.1 2011.4 ======== System Benchmarks Index Score 2517.4
Next are the Geekbench results, which are pretty impressive as well, with more than 5500 points:
System Information Platform: Linux x86 (32-bit) Compiler: GCC 4.1.2 20070925 (Red Hat 4.1.2-33) Operating System: Linux 2.6.32-042stab076.5 i686 Model: Linux PC (AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor) Motherboard: Unknown Motherboard Processor: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor Processor ID: AuthenticAMD Family 16 Model 4 Stepping 3 Logical Processors: 4 Physical Processors: 1 Processor Frequency: 3.50 GHz L1 Instruction Cache: 64.0 KB L1 Data Cache: 64.0 KB L2 Cache: 512 KB L3 Cache: 6.00 MB Bus Frequency: 0.00 Hz Memory: 1.00 GB Memory Type: N/A SIMD: 1 BIOS: N/A Processor Model: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor Processor Cores: 4 Integer Blowfish single-threaded scalar 2512 |||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 5708 |||||||||||||||||||||| Text Compress single-threaded scalar 2670 |||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 6722 |||||||||||||||||||||||||| Text Decompress single-threaded scalar 2693 |||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 7204 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Image Compress single-threaded scalar 2180 |||||||| multi-threaded scalar 5673 |||||||||||||||||||||| Image Decompress single-threaded scalar 1783 ||||||| multi-threaded scalar 4566 |||||||||||||||||| Lua single-threaded scalar 3901 ||||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 8776 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Floating Point Mandelbrot single-threaded scalar 2473 ||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 6527 |||||||||||||||||||||||||| Dot Product single-threaded scalar 3594 |||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 10269 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| single-threaded vector 3358 ||||||||||||| multi-threaded vector 9927 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| LU Decomposition single-threaded scalar 2902 ||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 4385 ||||||||||||||||| Primality Test single-threaded scalar 3363 ||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 6939 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Sharpen Image single-threaded scalar 9241 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 23867 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Blur Image single-threaded scalar 10030 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 26446 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Memory Read Sequential single-threaded scalar 3078 |||||||||||| Write Sequential single-threaded scalar 4623 |||||||||||||||||| Stdlib Allocate single-threaded scalar 3915 ||||||||||||||| Stdlib Write single-threaded scalar 1821 ||||||| Stdlib Copy single-threaded scalar 2827 ||||||||||| Stream Stream Copy single-threaded scalar 2649 |||||||||| single-threaded vector 3292 ||||||||||||| Stream Scale single-threaded scalar 1695 |||||| single-threaded vector 1700 |||||| Stream Add single-threaded scalar 1511 |||||| single-threaded vector 2934 ||||||||||| Stream Triad single-threaded scalar 1581 |||||| single-threaded vector 2417 ||||||||| Integer Score: 4532 |||||||||||||||||| Floating Point Score: 8808 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Memory Score: 3252 ||||||||||||| Stream Score: 2222 |||||||| Overall Geekbench Score: 5541 ||||||||||||||||||||||
It is also worth noting that the CPU is not throttled and you can actually use the full clock speed.
Testing again showed similar results:
System Information Platform: Linux x86 (32-bit) Compiler: GCC 4.1.2 20070925 (Red Hat 4.1.2-33) Operating System: Linux 2.6.32-042stab076.5 i686 Model: Linux PC (AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor) Motherboard: Unknown Motherboard Processor: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor Processor ID: AuthenticAMD Family 16 Model 4 Stepping 3 Logical Processors: 4 Physical Processors: 1 Processor Frequency: 800 MHz L1 Instruction Cache: 64.0 KB L1 Data Cache: 64.0 KB L2 Cache: 512 KB L3 Cache: 6.00 MB Bus Frequency: 0.00 Hz Memory: 1.00 GB Memory Type: N/A SIMD: 1 BIOS: N/A Processor Model: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 970 Processor Processor Cores: 4 Integer Blowfish single-threaded scalar 2525 |||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 7226 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Text Compress single-threaded scalar 2659 |||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 6614 |||||||||||||||||||||||||| Text Decompress single-threaded scalar 2689 |||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 7197 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Image Compress single-threaded scalar 2167 |||||||| multi-threaded scalar 5404 ||||||||||||||||||||| Image Decompress single-threaded scalar 1775 ||||||| multi-threaded scalar 4707 |||||||||||||||||| Lua single-threaded scalar 3892 ||||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 8804 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Floating Point Mandelbrot single-threaded scalar 2473 ||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 6487 ||||||||||||||||||||||||| Dot Product single-threaded scalar 3589 |||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 11582 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| single-threaded vector 3356 ||||||||||||| multi-threaded vector 11108 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| LU Decomposition single-threaded scalar 2949 ||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 8159 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Primality Test single-threaded scalar 3264 ||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 7144 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Sharpen Image single-threaded scalar 9248 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 23342 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Blur Image single-threaded scalar 10015 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| multi-threaded scalar 28767 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Memory Read Sequential single-threaded scalar 3080 |||||||||||| Write Sequential single-threaded scalar 4197 |||||||||||||||| Stdlib Allocate single-threaded scalar 3964 ||||||||||||||| Stdlib Write single-threaded scalar 1758 ||||||| Stdlib Copy single-threaded scalar 2826 ||||||||||| Stream Stream Copy single-threaded scalar 2629 |||||||||| single-threaded vector 2738 |||||||||| Stream Scale single-threaded scalar 2950 ||||||||||| single-threaded vector 1667 |||||| Stream Add single-threaded scalar 1509 |||||| single-threaded vector 1747 |||||| Stream Triad single-threaded scalar 3095 |||||||||||| single-threaded vector 2501 |||||||||| Integer Score: 4638 |||||||||||||||||| Floating Point Score: 9391 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Memory Score: 3165 |||||||||||| Stream Score: 2354 ||||||||| Overall Geekbench Score: 5778 |||||||||||||||||||||||
Overall, the disk space is obviously heavily oversold, and the download speed is probably a bit slow, however the CPU and the overall benchmark seems pretty good.
Customer Service and Support
I have had two interactions with the support of EaseVPS, one during the initial sign up to get the bandwidth doubled, and second time when I had the issue with logging into the VPS via SSH. The first one was logged in at 7:11am and was responded shortly after midnight, with about 14 hours of delay.The second ticket was sent in at about 4:30AM and was responded by approximately 6 hours later. As you can see, the respond is not super-fast but for the low end VPS, this is generally acceptable.
Furthermore, EaseVPS also has a monitoring system where if the VPS stop responding to ping, an automated email like the following one is generated:
More information about it could be found here. Although I have received a few false positives, I have to say EaseVPS is probably the only one who is having this kind of free monitoring added automatically to your account, which is actually pretty convenient.
Conclusion
I always like to list out the not-so-great aspects of the providers I am reviewing first in conclusion and for EaseVPS, the disk performance is probably one of the biggest concerns that I would have. Furthermore, the download speed, at least the download speed using Cachefly test files, are not exactly satisfactory although the uploading speed is pretty good. Furthermore, the AMD CPUs that it is using might be a little old (but way newer than the L5420 which many providers are using at the moment), however, the benchmark that came out of the VPS is pretty good. As an added feature, EaseVPS also automatically monitors the VPS for you and send you an automatic email whenever the VPS is offline. Although the stability probably still needs some improvement, it might be a good candidate for those running CPU-intensive applications with little requirements on disk I/O.
I am not sure how come the DD test is okay but the ioping is bad. Usually it’s either both good or both bad, right?
Is it possible that they have fewer disks in their raid, rather than heavily oversold? because if oversold, the CPU should be bad. I hope they upgrade the disks, so clients will be more happy.
@grails: EaseVPS claimed to use RAID 10 on their nodes: http://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/7552/easevps-ukusa-128256mb-15year-2048mb-7-00month although I didn’t verify that myself when I had the VPS. It might be the case where they just happened to have someone running some heavy disk I/O stuff when I did the ioping test. However that is something I can no longer verify as the VPS was cancelled.
it would be better on future reviews that repeat test be done on a different time. good review boss!
@grails tutorial: thanks for your encouragement!
I am on paid vps as well and I too have noticed a drastic change to my download speed from my vps to my home pc. Before, I was getting 600 kbps transfer rate using filezilla.Now over the past 2 days I’m maxing out at 70-80 kbps.I’m hoping this is a temporary problem and will be fixed soon because my vps is of no use to me if these speeds stay the same.