96MB Low End VPS Review Part XXXIX – Kazila
Nate from Kazila, emailed me back in September asking me to review their services. And of course, as the same as my previous review, I have to really apologize for delaying things so much. So let’s take a look at how solid the VPS from them are.
Basic Information and Set Up
As per the advertisement on LowEndBox, here is what you get for 7USD/month, the cheapest of their Xen VPS packages.
As per LEB, three locations are offered at this time, Los Angeles CA with Quadranet, Dallas TX with NorthTXConnect (UPDATE: they are now with GIP networks as per Nate), New York City with Steadfast Networks.
The sign up page is a heavily themed WHMCS in HTTPS, however I am a little surprised that after all the customization work, the order page still started off by asking you for a domain name, which is not necessary in WHMCS system. However, on the page it was stated that the domain does not have to be active or registered, which means basically you can put whatever you want.
The next step basically shows you clearly what you are getting, which is something rare among many of the VPS providers although I think it would be a great feature. Yes, I understand we should know what we are buying before we start to purchase, but for someone who has a fat finger like mine and who does not bother to check the prices once a while, it is good to confirm on this page in black and white what I was about to get:
The same page also shows the billing cycle, apparently Kazila does does give any discount even for annual payment, so unless you are someone who is too lazy to log into Paypal once a month, there is really no incentive for you to pay one year upfront:
There are quite a few OS templates available during sign up, however for some reason most of them are 64 bit OS templates, the templates for Arch Linux 2010 and Ubuntu 10.04 does not have x64 after the name, so I assume they are the only 32 bit templates.
Each additional IP address cost 2 USD, which is more expensive than the 1USD per month “standard” price:
There are 3 locations for you to choose from when signing up, and the good news is they are pretty geographically dispersed in continental US, which would be great if you need a US server.
Provision was not instant and I received my VPS information email almost 1.5 hours after receiving the invoice payment email.
Compare with most of the other VPS providers, the provision email from Kazila is a lot shorter and contains just the exact information I need:
As you can see, the SolusVM control panel is using a non-standard HTTPS port.
Unlike many of the VPS providers, the WHMCS interface does not provide any control of the VPS, under My Services, all you can see is strictly a description of the service:
However, there is a link to connect you to the SolusVM control panel, and after log in using the user name assigned (which I believe is manually generated based on the client’s name), you see a very standard VPS SolusVM control panel.
As usual, Central Backups is not available and there is no instant rDNS as well.
Also, it seems that the Root Password change does not work as well and you are always given the original root password that you have had in your VPS welcome email after the OS reinstallation.
There are quite a few OS templates available for installation, however the most impressive part is that they have a few templates that runs with PyGrub, which, if I remembered correctly, would enable you to run custom kernels:
Test on the VPS
As mentioned above, the VPS has 512MB of dedicated RAM (1024MB of swap space by default), 10GB of hard drive space and I have chosen the VPS in New York for testing purposes. Debian 6 64 bit was installed to perform the tests (except the GeekBench tests, where I had to run the 32 bit OS).
With a fresh OS installation, the VPS uses about 18MB of memory:
free -m
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 496 70 425 0 3 48
-/+ buffers/cache: 18 477
Swap: 1023 0 1023
Also, the total memory amount is not exactly 512MB, the total memory amount indicated in the free outut is actually full 16MB less than the amount of memory given, which I can only assume they are being used by the OS, similar to many of the Xen systems that I have reviewed before. Correctly me if I am wrong, but I actually think memory-wise, it makes more sense to get an OpenVZ system, where the kernel is running completely outside of the amount of memory that you are assigned to, rather than running a Xen, although obviously there are less things you could do with OpenVZ, which is not a full virtulization system, such as implementation of kernel-based modules.
And a little more than 800MB of hard drive was used, which is slightly more than a Debian 6 installation using the OpenVZ templates.
df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/xvda1 9.9G 806M 8.6G 9% / tmpfs 249M 0 249M 0% /lib/init/rw udev 235M 32K 235M 1% /dev tmpfs 249M 4.0K 249M 1% /dev/shm
iNodes is set to relatively high:
df -i Filesystem Inodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted on /dev/xvda1 1310720 24676 1286044 2% / tmpfs 63519 4 63515 1% /lib/init/rw udev 60122 396 59726 1% /dev tmpfs 63519 3 63516 1% /dev/shm
Top showing all the processes running by default:
top - 23:44:03 up 47 min, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Tasks: 45 total, 1 running, 44 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: 508156k total, 72528k used, 435628k free, 3196k buffers
Swap: 1048568k total, 0k used, 1048568k free, 50084k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
1001 root 20 0 70488 3392 2636 S 0.0 0.7 0:00.03 sshd
1004 root 20 0 18912 3124 1432 S 0.0 0.6 0:00.21 bash
538 root 20 0 54156 1576 1092 S 0.0 0.3 0:00.01 rsyslogd
1024 root 20 0 18932 1264 1000 R 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 top
692 root 20 0 49168 1144 592 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 sshd
839 Debian-e 20 0 42072 1048 664 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 exim4
571 root 20 0 20900 952 720 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 cron
1 root 20 0 8352 808 676 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.12 init
150 root 16 -4 16736 756 384 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.02 udevd
182 root 18 -2 16732 668 300 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 udevd
189 root 18 -2 16732 668 300 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 udevd
857 root 20 0 5928 624 520 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 getty
859 root 20 0 5928 624 520 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 getty
861 root 20 0 5928 624 520 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 getty
862 root 20 0 5928 624 520 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 getty
858 root 20 0 5928 620 520 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 getty
860 root 20 0 5928 620 520 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 getty
And as usual, the htop output for the htop fans:
With the full LNMP stack installed, slightly more than 80MB of RAM was used:
free -m
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 496 488 7 0 20 386
-/+ buffers/cache: 81 414
Swap: 1023 0 1023
Top output showing all the processes running:
top - 09:59:25 up 2:54, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Tasks: 58 total, 1 running, 57 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: 508156k total, 501000k used, 7156k free, 21500k buffers
Swap: 1048568k total, 220k used, 1048348k free, 396068k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
2215 www 20 0 50116 20m 456 S 0.0 4.2 0:00.02 nginx
14641 mysql 20 0 47800 6640 2648 S 0.0 1.3 0:00.02 mysqld
2205 root 20 0 104m 5604 1320 S 0.0 1.1 0:01.12 php-cgi
2206 www 20 0 104m 5160 876 S 0.0 1.0 0:00.00 php-cgi
2207 www 20 0 104m 5160 876 S 0.0 1.0 0:00.00 php-cgi
2210 www 20 0 104m 5160 876 S 0.0 1.0 0:00.00 php-cgi
2211 www 20 0 104m 5160 876 S 0.0 1.0 0:00.00 php-cgi
2212 www 20 0 104m 5160 876 S 0.0 1.0 0:00.00 php-cgi
1004 root 20 0 18912 2952 1260 S 0.0 0.6 0:00.23 bash
1001 root 20 0 70488 2172 1384 S 0.0 0.4 0:01.35 sshd
1367 root 20 0 17720 1804 1308 S 0.0 0.4 0:00.02 bash
538 root 20 0 54156 1456 972 S 0.0 0.3 0:00.02 rsyslogd
1366 root 20 0 23796 1308 676 S 0.0 0.3 0:01.12 screen
2272 root 20 0 19040 1288 1004 R 1.1 0.3 0:00.01 top
2213 root 20 0 30104 988 284 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 nginx
692 root 20 0 49168 972 420 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 sshd
1365 root 20 0 23532 968 728 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.02 screen
571 root 20 0 20900 912 680 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.01 cron
839 Debian-e 20 0 42072 908 524 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 exim4
1 root 20 0 8352 676 612 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.20 init
14539 root 20 0 3952 648 524 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 mysqld_safe
857 root 20 0 5928 596 492 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 getty
859 root 20 0 5928 596 492 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 getty
861 root 20 0 5928 596 492 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 getty
862 root 20 0 5928 596 492 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 getty
858 root 20 0 5928 592 492 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 getty
860 root 20 0 5928 592 492 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 getty
863 root 20 0 5928 592 492 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 getty
150 root 16 -4 16736 512 280 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.02 udevd
182 root 18 -2 16732 428 200 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 udevd
189 root 18 -2 16732 428 200 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 udevd
567 daemon 20 0 18708 420 252 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.00 atd
2 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 kthreadd
3 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 migration/0
4 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.31 ksoftirqd/0
5 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 watchdog/0
6 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.37 events/0
7 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 cpuset
8 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 khelper
9 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 netns
10 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 async/mgr
11 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 pm
12 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 xenwatch
13 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 xenbus
14 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.01 sync_supers
And the htop output:
The box used 2.2GB of hard drive space to run the full LNMP stack:
df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/xvda1 9.9G 2.2G 7.3G 23% / tmpfs 249M 0 249M 0% /lib/init/rw udev 235M 32K 235M 1% /dev tmpfs 249M 4.0K 249M 1% /dev/shm
VMStat was taken right after I have run a UnixBench test, therefore the idle values is a bit high:
vmstat procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu---- r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa 0 0 220 21844 25428 366608 0 0 13 103 53 937 7 8 85 0
Similarly, the last 3 numbers of uptime output is pretty high as well:
uptime 11:49:11 up 4:44, 1 user, load average: 0.10, 1.66, 1.45
Running it today shows much better results:
vmstat procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu---- r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa 0 0 220 6416 62376 372928 0 0 0 5 8 37 0 0 100 0
And the uptime output is similar:
uptime 05:44:18 up 5 days, 22:39, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
CPUinfo shows there is one CPU core assigned to the VPS, and it is not throttled:
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 : 2393.998 cache size : 12288 KB fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 11 wp : yes flags : fpu tsc msr pae cx8 cmov pat clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht syscall nx lm constant_tsc up rep_good nonstop_tsc aperfmperf pni pclmulqdq vmx est ssse3 cx16 sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt aes hypervisor lahf_lm ida arat tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority ept vpid bogomips : 4787.99 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management:
And the meminfo output:
cat /proc/meminfo MemTotal: 508156 kB MemFree: 15704 kB Buffers: 9960 kB Cached: 414824 kB SwapCached: 124 kB Active: 53260 kB Inactive: 408520 kB Active(anon): 16756 kB Inactive(anon): 20288 kB Active(file): 36504 kB Inactive(file): 388232 kB Unevictable: 0 kB Mlocked: 0 kB SwapTotal: 1048568 kB SwapFree: 1048348 kB Dirty: 0 kB Writeback: 0 kB AnonPages: 36876 kB Mapped: 7072 kB Shmem: 48 kB Slab: 23544 kB SReclaimable: 20316 kB SUnreclaim: 3228 kB KernelStack: 456 kB PageTables: 2668 kB NFS_Unstable: 0 kB Bounce: 0 kB WritebackTmp: 0 kB CommitLimit: 1302644 kB Committed_AS: 120148 kB VmallocTotal: 34359738367 kB VmallocUsed: 2108 kB VmallocChunk: 34359736040 kB HardwareCorrupted: 0 kB HugePages_Total: 0 HugePages_Free: 0 HugePages_Rsvd: 0 HugePages_Surp: 0 Hugepagesize: 2048 kB DirectMap4k: 524288 kB DirectMap2M: 0 kB
As well as the time sync:
time sync real 0m0.008s user 0m0.004s sys 0m0.004s
Disk I/O, in this case, is really impressive, I was able to get over 200MB/s on the DD test, which is almost the same as the throughput for some SSD drives:
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, 4.88499 s, 220 MB/s
Test again showed even 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, 3.646 s, 294 MB/s
IOPing is actually very stable, which is another good news:
ioping -c 10 . 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=1 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=2 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=3 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=4 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=5 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=6 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=7 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=8 time=0.3 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=9 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=10 time=0.2 ms --- . (ext3 /dev/xvda1) ioping statistics --- 10 requests completed in 9003.4 ms, 5030 iops, 19.6 mb/s min/avg/max/mdev = 0.2/0.2/0.3/0.0 ms
Test again showed similar output, which is something pretty impressive.
ioping -c 10 . 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=1 time=0.1 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=2 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=3 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=4 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=5 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=6 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=7 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=8 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=9 time=0.2 ms 4096 bytes from . (ext3 /dev/xvda1): request=10 time=0.1 ms --- . (ext3 /dev/xvda1) ioping statistics --- 10 requests completed in 9003.3 ms, 5476 iops, 21.4 mb/s min/avg/max/mdev = 0.1/0.2/0.2/0.0 ms
Network is pretty solid also, I was able to get about 11MB/s for the Cachefly download test.
wget cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2011-12-28 11:50:14-- 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 2011-12-28 11:50:24 (11.0 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
Testing again showed very consistent results:
wget cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2012-01-03 08:53:38-- 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 11.0M/s in 9.1s 2012-01-03 08:53:47 (11.0 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
The upload speed from the server is pretty good as well, and best of all, it does not change a lot no matter where the actual location of my test VPS is:
First, the VPS from BuffloVPS in Chicago, IL, which, surprisingly, turned out to be the slowest although it is located along the east coast as well:
wget 69.162.169.246/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2012-01-02 19:57:10-- http://69.162.169.246/100mb.test Connecting to 69.162.169.246:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream] Saving to: `/dev/null' 100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 9.62M/s in 14s 2012-01-02 19:57:24 (7.38 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
BuyVM VPS in San Jose, CA, was a little faster in this case:
wget 69.162.169.246/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2012-01-02 19:58:03-- http://69.162.169.246/100mb.test Connecting to 69.162.169.246:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream] Saving to: `/dev/null' 100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 11.2M/s in 10s 2012-01-02 19:58:14 (9.78 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
And finally, my Quickweb VPS in London, UK:
wget 69.162.169.246/100mb.test -O /dev/null --2012-01-02 20:02:32-- http://69.162.169.246/100mb.test Connecting to 69.162.169.246:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream] Saving to: `/dev/null' 100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 11.2M/s in 9.6s 2012-01-02 20:02:42 (10.4 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
The benchmark time, as for all my reviews, come the last in the tests. With only one CPU core available, unfortunately there is little dount that the benchmark score is not going to be really high:
# # # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # #
# # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # # #
# # # # # # ## ##### ##### # # # # ######
# # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # #
# # # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # #
#### # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # #
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
========================================================================
BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.3)
System: ********: GNU/Linux
OS: GNU/Linux -- 2.6.32-5-amd64 -- #1 SMP Mon Oct 3 03:59:20 UTC 2011
Machine: x86_64 (unknown)
Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="UTF-8", collate="UTF-8")
CPU 0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz (4788.0 bogomips)
Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
10:01:01 up 2:56, 1 user, load average: 0.08, 0.02, 0.01; runlevel 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark Run: Wed Dec 28 2011 10:01:01 - 10:28:45
1 CPU in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests
Dhrystone 2 using register variables 17513291.8 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Double-Precision Whetstone 2179.2 MWIPS (8.8 s, 7 samples)
Execl Throughput 1250.5 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 203106.6 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 55388.7 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 625563.5 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Pipe Throughput 327805.5 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Pipe-based Context Switching 59234.7 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Process Creation 2380.9 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 2537.4 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 321.9 lpm (60.2 s, 2 samples)
System Call Overhead 362203.8 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX
Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 17513291.8 1500.7
Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 2179.2 396.2
Execl Throughput 43.0 1250.5 290.8
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 203106.6 512.9
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 55388.7 334.7
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 625563.5 1078.6
Pipe Throughput 12440.0 327805.5 263.5
Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 59234.7 148.1
Process Creation 126.0 2380.9 189.0
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 2537.4 598.5
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 321.9 536.5
System Call Overhead 15000.0 362203.8 241.5
========
System Benchmarks Index Score 402.9
Test again showed almost the same 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
========================================================================
BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.3)
System: *******: GNU/Linux
OS: GNU/Linux -- 2.6.32-5-amd64 -- #1 SMP Mon Oct 3 03:59:20 UTC 2011
Machine: x86_64 (unknown)
Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="UTF-8", collate="UTF-8")
CPU 0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz (4788.0 bogomips)
Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
11:17:18 up 4:12, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.05; runlevel 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark Run: Wed Dec 28 2011 11:17:18 - 11:45:00
1 CPU in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests
Dhrystone 2 using register variables 17130505.4 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Double-Precision Whetstone 2342.4 MWIPS (8.4 s, 7 samples)
Execl Throughput 1250.9 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 209431.8 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 52894.0 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 609856.6 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Pipe Throughput 333491.7 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Pipe-based Context Switching 67126.6 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Process Creation 2365.8 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 2486.8 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 323.8 lpm (60.1 s, 2 samples)
System Call Overhead 356025.6 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX
Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 17130505.4 1467.9
Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 2342.4 425.9
Execl Throughput 43.0 1250.9 290.9
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 209431.8 528.9
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 52894.0 319.6
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 609856.6 1051.5
Pipe Throughput 12440.0 333491.7 268.1
Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 67126.6 167.8
Process Creation 126.0 2365.8 187.8
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 2486.8 586.5
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 323.8 539.7
System Call Overhead 15000.0 356025.6 237.4
========
System Benchmarks Index Score 406.8
GeekBench results was definitely a lot better:
System Information
Platform: Linux x86 (32-bit)
Compiler: GCC 4.1.2 20070925 (Red Hat 4.1.2-33)
Operating System: Linux 2.6.32-5-686-bigmem 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: 1
Physical Processors: 1
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: 501 MB
Memory Type: N/A
SIMD: 1
BIOS: N/A
Processor Model: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz
Processor Cores: 1
Integer
Blowfish
single-threaded scalar 1110 ||||
multi-threaded scalar 1882 |||||||
Text Compress
single-threaded scalar 1275 |||||
multi-threaded scalar 1439 |||||
Text Decompress
single-threaded scalar 1792 |||||||
multi-threaded scalar 2104 ||||||||
Image Compress
single-threaded scalar 1676 ||||||
multi-threaded scalar 1643 ||||||
Image Decompress
single-threaded scalar 1532 ||||||
multi-threaded scalar 1574 ||||||
Lua
single-threaded scalar 2481 |||||||||
multi-threaded scalar 3136 ||||||||||||
Floating Point
Mandelbrot
single-threaded scalar 2120 ||||||||
multi-threaded scalar 2152 ||||||||
Dot Product
single-threaded scalar 3458 |||||||||||||
multi-threaded scalar 3663 ||||||||||||||
single-threaded vector 4105 ||||||||||||||||
multi-threaded vector 4729 ||||||||||||||||||
LU Decomposition
single-threaded scalar 2414 |||||||||
multi-threaded scalar 2454 |||||||||
Primality Test
single-threaded scalar 3010 ||||||||||||
multi-threaded scalar 2779 |||||||||||
Sharpen Image
single-threaded scalar 5757 |||||||||||||||||||||||
multi-threaded scalar 4889 |||||||||||||||||||
Blur Image
single-threaded scalar 5351 |||||||||||||||||||||
multi-threaded scalar 5356 |||||||||||||||||||||
Memory
Read Sequential
single-threaded scalar 3331 |||||||||||||
Write Sequential
single-threaded scalar 6241 ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stdlib Allocate
single-threaded scalar 3777 |||||||||||||||
Stdlib Write
single-threaded scalar 3507 ||||||||||||||
Stdlib Copy
single-threaded scalar 6981 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stream
Stream Copy
single-threaded scalar 4011 ||||||||||||||||
single-threaded vector 6606 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stream Scale
single-threaded scalar 2921 |||||||||||
single-threaded vector 6601 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stream Add
single-threaded scalar 3312 |||||||||||||
single-threaded vector 6354 |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stream Triad
single-threaded scalar 3932 |||||||||||||||
single-threaded vector 4668 ||||||||||||||||||
Integer Score: 1803 |||||||
Floating Point Score: 3731 ||||||||||||||
Memory Score: 4767 |||||||||||||||||||
Stream Score: 4800 |||||||||||||||||||
Overall Geekbench Score: 3370 |||||||||||||
Testing again gives consistent results:
System Information
Platform: Linux x86 (32-bit)
Compiler: GCC 4.1.2 20070925 (Red Hat 4.1.2-33)
Operating System: Linux 2.6.32-5-686-bigmem 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: 1
Physical Processors: 1
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: 501 MB
Memory Type: N/A
SIMD: 1
BIOS: N/A
Processor Model: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5620 @ 2.40GHz
Processor Cores: 1
Integer
Blowfish
single-threaded scalar 1125 ||||
multi-threaded scalar 1660 ||||||
Text Compress
single-threaded scalar 1996 |||||||
multi-threaded scalar 1867 |||||||
Text Decompress
single-threaded scalar 1495 |||||
multi-threaded scalar 1986 |||||||
Image Compress
single-threaded scalar 1216 ||||
multi-threaded scalar 1646 ||||||
Image Decompress
single-threaded scalar 1532 ||||||
multi-threaded scalar 1575 ||||||
Lua
single-threaded scalar 3136 ||||||||||||
multi-threaded scalar 2676 ||||||||||
Floating Point
Mandelbrot
single-threaded scalar 1338 |||||
multi-threaded scalar 2155 ||||||||
Dot Product
single-threaded scalar 3458 |||||||||||||
multi-threaded scalar 3665 ||||||||||||||
single-threaded vector 4116 ||||||||||||||||
multi-threaded vector 4746 ||||||||||||||||||
LU Decomposition
single-threaded scalar 2416 |||||||||
multi-threaded scalar 2462 |||||||||
Primality Test
single-threaded scalar 3483 |||||||||||||
multi-threaded scalar 2792 |||||||||||
Sharpen Image
single-threaded scalar 3628 ||||||||||||||
multi-threaded scalar 3665 ||||||||||||||
Blur Image
single-threaded scalar 3514 ||||||||||||||
multi-threaded scalar 4884 |||||||||||||||||||
Memory
Read Sequential
single-threaded scalar 3282 |||||||||||||
Write Sequential
single-threaded scalar 5404 |||||||||||||||||||||
Stdlib Allocate
single-threaded scalar 2384 |||||||||
Stdlib Write
single-threaded scalar 2914 |||||||||||
Stdlib Copy
single-threaded scalar 5932 |||||||||||||||||||||||
Stream
Stream Copy
single-threaded scalar 3939 |||||||||||||||
single-threaded vector 5635 ||||||||||||||||||||||
Stream Scale
single-threaded scalar 2891 |||||||||||
single-threaded vector 6623 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stream Add
single-threaded scalar 3568 ||||||||||||||
single-threaded vector 6344 |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stream Triad
single-threaded scalar 3493 |||||||||||||
single-threaded vector 4013 ||||||||||||||||
Integer Score: 1825 |||||||
Floating Point Score: 3308 |||||||||||||
Memory Score: 3983 |||||||||||||||
Stream Score: 4563 ||||||||||||||||||
Overall Geekbench Score: 3049 ||||||||||||
Customer Service and Support
Nate seems to do a pretty good job in the customer support, my support ticket with him was answered in about 20 minutes and the response was pretty professional as well, which is something the providers fail to recognize. More often than not, I see responses that are misspelled, or just a plain “yes” or “no” type of one-word answer. I know this is low end VPS and perhaps the person who is sending the email is looking to response another 200 emails in the next hour. However, as an online business, how one present themselves online is actually pretty important. I have to say, from that aspect, Nate did a pretty good in presenting their company in a professional manner.
Conclusion
What Kazila has impressed me the most is not really the amount of the resources they have offered, nor the price tag that is attached to the VPS, but the stability of the VPS. More often than not, many VPS providers promises large amount of resources at an incredibly cheap price, only to make everything “burstable”, for one second I could get disk I/O in 3 digit range, the next second the DD test running on the same VPS would only give me low 30. However, at least during the short period of time that I was reviewing this VPS, the incident has not happened to me. Therefore, I have to say I am actually really pleased with the consistency of the performance of the VPS, together with the ample amount of options for the OS templates (including pyGrub templates), made it a budget choice for the performance-conscious VPS users.
Pingback: 96MB Low End VPS Review Part XXXX – DotVPS | | 96MB.com96MB.com