Results 1 to 25 of 29
-
12-06-2009, 04:13 AM #1Newbie
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Posts
- 23
Is cheapest VPS still better than shared hosting?
Is the cheapest VPS available still better than going with shared hosting?
-
12-06-2009, 04:17 AM #2Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- New York City
- Posts
- 5,169
It depends, I would say yes a cheap VPS might be better than a Shared Hosting plan, 1 because you get more acesses and power to the server. Also because your on a ip and not on a crowded server.
In some ways it can't because you can pay less money for shared hosting and get a better plan on your spectations such as disk space, and bandwidth, etc..
-
12-06-2009, 04:26 AM #3Web Hosting Evangelist
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
- Posts
- 545
VPS with less resource is no better than shared hosting.
-
12-06-2009, 04:29 AM #4Newbie
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Posts
- 23
Hmm I see......
-
12-06-2009, 04:46 AM #5Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Location
- NYC / Memphis, TN
- Posts
- 1,454
All depends on the VPS.. It also depends on what you're running. If you require root access, install options, then a VPS is the way to go.
On the other hand like praveen mentioned, some providers sell VPS' as low as 200mhz. Unless you're with an incredibly oversold shared hosting provider, you're likely to have way more resources than that available for serving pages.≈ PeakVPN.Com | Complete Privacy VPN | Cloud Hosting | Guaranteed Security | 1Gbps-10Gbps Unmetered
≈ PeakVPN | 31 VPN Servers | 17-Years Experience | Emergency 24/7 Support
≈ Visit us @ PeakVPN.Com (Coming SOON) | ASN: 3915
-
12-06-2009, 05:24 AM #6Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
- Singapore
- Posts
- 4,685
Depending on the resources of the VPS and the needs of your website(s).
-
12-06-2009, 05:56 AM #7Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Posts
- 2,222
See http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showpo...6&postcount=13
"If I understand the stats correctly, it seems like the low-cost shared hosting account is better than the VPS I have? Man, this is disappointing!"
-
12-06-2009, 07:09 AM #8Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Posts
- 79
Cheapest VPS are usually for utility hosting like DNS hosting and sorts.
-
12-06-2009, 08:26 AM #9WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
- Posts
- 134
Well, If you get a cheap VPS from a reputable hosting company I would suggest you to go with VPS then.
Is your site is more busy? How many visits a day?
-
12-06-2009, 09:24 AM #10Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Posts
- 637
http://www.lowendbox.com/blog/yes-yo...mb-link-1-vps/
You can squeeze out quite a bit from a "cheapest VPS" if you run lighttpd with optimizations to mysql and php and nothing else.
I'd still go for shared hosting if you're looking to pay $5 or so, you get a lot more for the money e.g imap, webmail, spamassasin, control panel and the joy that everything is ready to use.
-
12-06-2009, 01:35 PM #11Newbie
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Posts
- 23
I can allocate $25 per month for hosting if that helps. I will be running Joomla and some of its extensions and LiveCart for the shopping cart.
-
12-06-2009, 01:57 PM #12Uptime Aficionado
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- /usr/bin/perl
- Posts
- 971
In an ideal world where the cheapest VPS wasn't on a heavily oversold node that crashed every couple of days, yes.
In the real world there's still a place for shared hosting. I would never recommend going with a $5 VPS host -- that's just asking for trouble.Ask me about CloudCentrum (coming soon) -- The complete, turn-key cloud software solution
-
12-07-2009, 05:53 AM #13Support Facility
- Join Date
- Jun 2009
- Posts
- 2,335
Well, the cheap VPS might be better if you have some experience of technical and server management level. If you are totally new then its better to start with shared. Actually its also depends on your disk space and bandwidth requirements.
-
12-07-2009, 06:40 AM #14Newbie
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
- Posts
- 26
IMO, yes, cheaper VPS is better than Shared Hosting. It allows you to get full root access. You may install any applications you want. What else do you need for a cheaper cost?
-
12-07-2009, 06:48 AM #15Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- London, UK
- Posts
- 1,765
In most cases, no. A cheap VPS on poor quality hardware with only 256MB of RAM will tend to be slower, less reliable and less scalability (headroom) than decent quality shared hosting.
The only reason to go for a cheap VPS is if you absolutely need the flexibility/control - ideally, you should go for a quality provider that has good support and uses good, non-overloaded hardware (pretty much the same criteria for shared hosting).Darren Lingham - Stablepoint Hosting
Stablepoint - Cloud Web Hosting without compromise
We provide industry-leading cPanel™ web hosting in 80+ global cities.
-
12-07-2009, 07:13 AM #16Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
- Singapore
- Posts
- 4,685
-
12-07-2009, 08:26 AM #17[ VPS Enthusiast ]
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
- Location
- Cheltenham, UK
- Posts
- 1,416
Depends on the kind of things you want to use it for.
If you're literally just looking to host your sites on it, then it's probably not worth the effort you'd have to put into the initial setup & maintenance.
However, if you need the freedom to do what you like with the server e.g. say you need to compile some extra PHP extensions, install that additional program you wanted, etc. then in that case it is worth while.
Just my $0.02█ Ben Thomas, Director - BTCentral Web Development Services
█ http://www.btcentral.org.uk - Need a custom Web App? Visit us online.
-
12-07-2009, 10:20 AM #18Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Posts
- 3,207
█ ControlVM.com :: Elastic Cloud Hosting Alternatives to VPS ● Reliable Cloud Server
█ Enterprise Hosting @ Malaysia ● Germany ● USA ● Singapore
We Accept: Paypal ● Alipay ● GrabPay ● Credit/Debit Card ● FPX Bank Transfer ● Bank TT
-
12-07-2009, 10:31 AM #19Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Sep 2005
- Location
- USA
- Posts
- 431
How? Shared hosting can be just as flexible. If it wasnt for such harshly oversold shared providers, there wouldnt be this large movement for cheap and budget vps solutions. But now theyre even ruining that by harshly overselling. It's a never ending cycle, people just want to know they arent going to be miss managed. And people have ruined both aspects of it. And people such as you with that statement have the miss informed believing that they have to have a vps to avoid being on slow over cramped servers.
The only advantage is for people who want to install their own applications. The whole idea of the vps was to get a nice medium between shared hosting and dedicated hosting. But you have people skipping the shared hosting aspect.
I personally would rather be on semi dedicated shared hosting. I know what my resources are, I know only a certain number of clients are also on board, and I know I'm getting what I'm paying for. And the server management aspect is taken care of. But its sad people dont see it that way and semi didicated hosting is a dying breed.Last edited by B r a n d o n; 12-07-2009 at 10:37 AM.
PRESSD - Dynamic WordPress Hosting v2 is in BETA status, set to launch 1st q 2019.
PRESSD is an OKTANE.COMPANY
-
12-07-2009, 10:40 AM #20WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Apr 2007
- Posts
- 147
It's a big difference between vps and vps.
I have try some small vps to rune some tests on,
some vps run very well, and someone you can't use at all.
Take a look in http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=409584
fore some performance reports.
Good luck
-
12-07-2009, 10:58 AM #21Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Posts
- 3,207
Originally Posted by B r a n d o n█ ControlVM.com :: Elastic Cloud Hosting Alternatives to VPS ● Reliable Cloud Server
█ Enterprise Hosting @ Malaysia ● Germany ● USA ● Singapore
We Accept: Paypal ● Alipay ● GrabPay ● Credit/Debit Card ● FPX Bank Transfer ● Bank TT
-
12-07-2009, 11:07 AM #22Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- London, UK
- Posts
- 1,765
In the same vein, can you control your provider not to use horribly overloaded hardware for VPS?
Some cheap providers are using low-end CPUs (perhaps only dual core), 8GB RAM and one or two SATA disks and think they can host 30 x 256MB VPSs - they think the only limitation to how many VPSs they can put on a system is the RAM.Darren Lingham - Stablepoint Hosting
Stablepoint - Cloud Web Hosting without compromise
We provide industry-leading cPanel™ web hosting in 80+ global cities.
-
12-07-2009, 11:14 AM #23Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Posts
- 3,207
█ ControlVM.com :: Elastic Cloud Hosting Alternatives to VPS ● Reliable Cloud Server
█ Enterprise Hosting @ Malaysia ● Germany ● USA ● Singapore
We Accept: Paypal ● Alipay ● GrabPay ● Credit/Debit Card ● FPX Bank Transfer ● Bank TT
-
12-07-2009, 11:20 AM #24Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Location
- Sacramento CA
- Posts
- 3,513
Your question is way too broad. Are there low end VPS's out there that are better then shared hosting? Sure. Just as there are higher end (and priced) VPS's out there that are no better (and some even worse) then shared.
The question gets more complicated (as some have suggested) by your specific needs. Do you need root access? Do you need support? Etc... So while a cheap VPS may provide you with root access if you don't need it then having it doesn't make one better then shared hosting. On the other side a VPS may give you better performance but if the low end VPS comes with little or no support and you need hand holding then what is better for you?
-
12-07-2009, 05:09 PM #25Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Sep 2005
- Location
- USA
- Posts
- 431
PRESSD - Dynamic WordPress Hosting v2 is in BETA status, set to launch 1st q 2019.
PRESSD is an OKTANE.COMPANY
Similar Threads
-
We have been here since 2003 - can the other guys say that??! Cheapest Shared Hosting
By Tagged in forum Shared Hosting OffersReplies: 0Last Post: 09-06-2008, 08:25 PM -
We have been here since 2003 - can the other guys say that??! Cheapest Shared Hosting
By Tagged in forum Shared Hosting OffersReplies: 0Last Post: 07-25-2008, 11:45 PM