hi guys,


I am hosting a download site which requires huge amount of bandwidth. My current bandwidth usage is about 80GB/month, and it is expected to growth in the future. Most virtusl hosts offer less than 20GB bandwidth, so my site is currently hosted in 4 different virtual servers in order to distribute the bandwidth. I paid more than $160.00/month for the 4 accounts.

So, instead of hosting my site at several virtual accounts, I decided to get a dedicated server so there will be less accounts to managed, and hopefully less bill to pay.

Here is the specss:

1) at least 300GB bandwidth per month

2) cost less than $250.00/month

3) 10+GB hard drive space

4) MySQL, PHP, Perl, java runtime, support (doesn't have to be pre-install)


Can anyone of you recommend any company that offer packages that meets these criteria?

thanks.

Two servers from rackshack.net ought to do it.

Other than rackshack, you're going to be hard-pressed to find anyone that will sell you bandwidth for less than $1 per GB. Of course, I still don't think I know anyone that's been able to hit 150GB at rackshack.

Originally posted by Planet Z
Other than rackshack, you're going to be hard-pressed to find anyone that will sell you bandwidth for less than $1 per GB. Of course, I still don't think I know anyone that's been able to hit 150GB at rackshack.

Aloha
do they cut people off tried a search for this never could find it
but figured they will with how bad they are at service

to high bandwith what about efreeservers they have pretty good bandwith ??

I don't know about cutting people off...

But I just don't know of anyone that's been able to get a RaQ4 w/ 128MB of RAM to do 150GB of transfer. I think it's more of a hardware thing than a network thing.

Haven't heard anything bad about efreeservers. It seems their salespeople are a little clueless, though (previous posts re: php, nameservers, etc). Plus you don't really want to have to have them install anything for you (at $200 a pop!).

Thanks guys. I visited rackshack's site before, and their plans looks good to me. I haven't signed up yet because I am hoping to find more companies that offer similar packages.

I assume that most of you guys here are renting servers to host people's sites, so network speed and uptime are extremenly important to you guys. I am neither running a mission critical website nor hosting other people's website, so I don't have that many things to worry about.

Maybe I will give it a try, just hope that rackshack can deliever the services I needed.

I'm not sure you could find a deal better than rackshack's. Let's see, two Raq4is, 300gb transfer, even if you upgraded the memory to 512mb each box you're still only paying $360 a month for 300gb transfer.

Aloha
well if you have read other posts for me you will know what I think of rackshack as they have no support and they suck at dns so every time I say do your own dns if you get a racksahck server
they seem to have a few network glitches
now on the good side for non critical stuff they will do OK if it is mission critical stuff go somewhere else
the other thing is they do have very good connect speeds and a network that can seem to handle bandwith OK from the test I have done
so that is the good thing again ya get what ya pay for

hi honu, how did you test their network speed? Any sites using rackshack's server? It would be good if I can do a download test....

honu, is it hard to setup the dns by yourself?

Aloha
I'll gladly set up a dl for ya
give me your url of a file to dl I will dl it and stick it up on my raq for ya to test
I did not open it to anon ftp so it would be via http the dl that is

Yeah DNS is easy to setup on the raq have to do it to tis one but going to move one account off it first
they screwed up my dns so much
figure if you do your own dns if your site goes down so does your dns but who cares your site is down ??
heheheh

But I just don't know of anyone that's been able to get a RaQ4 w/ 128MB of RAM to do 150GB of transfer. I think it's more of a hardware thing than a network thing.

We have a customers download site pushing 250 GB's/mo and growing on a RAQ2!!!

We use rackshack, and I am very happy with them.

Uptime is like 100% almost, if you need minimal support then they are excellent for you. There speeds are decent, not the very best, they have been having a few router problems.

I signed up for rackshack.net yesterday. So far, it is excellent. I was able to upload files and configure my server in few minutes. The speed is good too.

BTW, for those of you who have dedicated servers at rackshack. Could you please tell me what is your average bandwidth usage per month? and how many sites you host on your server? Thanks.

If you not sure with Cobalt Raq to handle 300 GB/ month data transfer,

There was an IBM x servers that though enough to do that....

You can check it at http://www.dialtoneinternet.net
They have 2 choice of OS, either windows 2000 or Linux...

You can contact clara@dialtoneinternet.net to further information...

Regards
Adhytia WS

I am with 4webspace.com. Very happy. RaQ3 , 100GB transfer, $99 pm. Only thing is you'll need more RAM (they only come with 32mb) BUT the good thing is a memory upgrae is a one off fee and not a monthly expense like it is at rackshack. Someone posted on the board recently saying he has a dedicated with 4webspace, and another with rackshack, and he prefers 4ws.

Really good support too, and i haven't noticed one second of downtime.

I think 4webspace is good too, but rackshack offers more space and bandwidth. :-)

Yeah, choosing between 4ws and Rackshack depends very much on individual circumstances.

4ws were perfect for me, apart from the low memory on start up.

however, they emailed me today announcing their special offer on 512MB : $100 - $150 depending on how much memory is alrweady in there!

. and that's a one off fee, not monthly. So now I am even more pleased I went with 4ws.

This is the first time I get a dedicated server. How much memory do we really need anyway? I don' t have that many sites(about 10 sites) on my server but there are lots of traffic mainly due to file downloads, is 128MB enough?

If you don't have resource intensive scripts running, it *should* be enough, though really the only way to know for sure is to run the server and if you see that it needs more, bump it up. Limit on RaQ3/4 is 512.