Web Hosting Talk : Web Hosting Main Forums : VPS Hosting : VPS vs Dedicated

[ScottdaleHosting]

I've never used a VPS. Instead, I've always stuck to dedicated servers. What I'm trying to figure out though is that if I purchase a VPS with 4000mhz CPU and 4GB Ram Guaranteed, what is the catch? I mean I can barely get a budget dedicated server at half that cpu speed/ram for under $100/month. Yet the VPS can be purchased for $50-60/month. Is there any slower performance on a VPS than a dedicated server? I'm tempted to try a VPS for some shared hosting accounts, but not sure if its better to just stick to dedicated servers. Any thoughts are appreciated.

[Deroba]

Maybe because you can oversell VPS, renting a dedicated is more expensive than getting hardware and co-locating it for VPS service.

VPS generally gives more, but limits you, while your dedicated is all yours and if you are out of resources they won't take you down, your server will just be damn slow or need for reboot

[wasatch]

If you have to choose between VPS and dedicated and you have concerns about performance then ultimately you should lean towards dedicated. While VPS offers dedicated resources you may still find yourself needing more at some point. On the other hand have you considered a VPS Cloud solution? That might be the right balance you are looking for.

[walterheck]

VPS has wonderful advantages, but you have to make sure that you go with a good provider. Many VPS providers oversell their servers, which ultimately makes them suck at the worst times.
Providers like Linode (there's more, but I only have experience with Linode) pledge to not oversell, and as such their performance is wonderful. I would even argue that in soem cases it is better then dedicated with teh same resources, as they use very powerful CPU's that even though they are shared can calculate faster then the (possibly) budget CPU in your dedicated server.
Besides that, good VPS gives you a lot more things like good scalability (with Linode you can scale up or down literally at the press of a button) and flexibility (you can setup a new server literally in 3 minutes, and decomission it after a day and not be charged for more then just that day).

Anyway, as seems to be the rule with any kind of hosting: you get what you pay for

[Jerrick]

is it using vps performance will be worst than using dedicated server?

[antonybanton]

just to add that dedicated is more secure than vps

[expo09]

Dedicated is more secure and overall a better service.

[jebra]

Originally Posted by expo09

Dedicated is more secure and overall a better service.

Dedicated is every thing yours. VPS is a big share hosting

[ControlVM Technology]

with $100/month probably you can't get dual quad core cpu and 2GB ram. but with $100/month you can get VPS with dual quad core cpu and 2GB ram.....
Of course, performance wise you might have the full resource allocation....

[Richard-BCS]

Originally Posted by Deroba

Maybe because you can oversell VPS, renting a dedicated is more expensive than getting hardware and co-locating it for VPS service.

...

This depends, Colocating servers can be more expensive then renting them. If you colocate large amounts of servers, it will be cheaper in the long run but colocating 2-3 servers is generally going to be more expensive.

Originally Posted by CH Hosting

with $100/month probably you can't get dual quad core cpu and 2GB ram. but with $100/month you can get VPS with dual quad core cpu and 2GB ram.....
Of course, performance wise you might have the full resource allocation....

That is true, but you won't find any provider that will let you use that whole dual quad CPU with your VPS.

[HostXNow]

Originally Posted by wasatch

On the other hand have you considered a VPS Cloud solution? That might be the right balance you are looking for.

I agree. Cloud VPS can be just as good as Dedicated with the right provider.

[ControlVM Technology]

Originally Posted by Richard-BCS

That is true, but you won't find any provider that will let you use that whole dual quad CPU with your VPS.

Ah...my mistake,
" Of course, performance wise you might NOT have the full resources allocation...."

[fiberhead]

It depends on what you need?

If you need real CPU-power then you should use a dedi server. Nothing is better than this option. Otherway, when you use a VPS with shared 8-core Xeon, it is fast. But you don't have the power all the time. That's the point.
At the security point, you can secure your VPS and your dedi the same way. Both the same.
Overselling...Ahhh. YES many companies think the can make money this way. tststst.
So when you choose a VPS than with XEN and nothing else.

You want to create a shared hosting, right? Then use the dedi.

[suhailc]

Here's a layman's guide:

A VPS is like living in a block of flats - you may have good or bad neighbours. You share the electricity, the water, the central heating.

A dedicated server is like living in a fully detached house.