Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2002

    Performance - (can you really answer it?)

    Currently I have reseller account. No issues. Got tempted with VPS. Signed up with one (currently with in 30 days trial).

    I put same php script on both accounts to see performance. I thought VPS account will have better performance, but it is otherwise.

    Question: Why reseller account has better performance? Not to presume that I am sole there. Machine has couple of thousand domains/sites (from other clients).

    Is Virtuozzo a resource hog?

    Which of the following combination will provide better performance (considering Machine specs are same):

    Dedicated + plesk

    Or Control panel has no effect on performance?

    Let us not get into that which control panel has better functionalities or more popular.

    Another point, both reseller and VPS, are among highly rated good companies in WHT and let us not bring their name into the mix.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Dillon, CO
    what are the computer specs & bandwidth from the different hosts
    Visit |█| Fluxbits Hosting |█| for all of your SSD Web hosting needs!
    FluxBits Hosting, Based out of Dillon, CO, USA. Behold the power of SSDs.
    Proud to be a member of the wonderful WebHostingTalk community.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Syracuse, NY
    Webmin has the least effect on performance but is the worst (what do you expect, it's free). cPanel has the most effect on performance. For a good medium of performance and quality, i'd reccomend DirectAdmin. It's basically Plesk that's lighter and less feature packed. (And hence slightly cheaper).

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    It really depends on how technical you are. Cpanel is probably the easiest to set up and use but as others have said uses a bit of resources. Webmin is the least resource intensive but is not really built for webhosting so you would need to spend quite a bit of time configuring it..

    The only other CP I have used is DirectAdmin which is the best of both worlds and can be had for pennies which makes it even more attractive

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Southwest UK
    Are any of these control panels resource inrtensive at all? I mean, apart from when you're actually logged on to it and are using it which is a minority of the time anyway, none of them get in the way at all - they only configure the external apps and then let them get on with it.

    Your issue with VPS - sure, you can have a couple of thousand sites on a server, most serving 1 page a day so you can see good performance from your site.. when you go to a VPS solution, you just cannot see how many VPSes the host has stuck on the machine. I'd say that anyone with a VPS requires more power than most websites, so its not that surprising to see worse performance.

    I think in the end the adage, you get what you pay for, should be borne in mind. Perhaps you should contact your new host and complain.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    I've worked on the internals of both, in a nutshell...

    A *lot* of shops run their shared systems on very high end hardware and pack them dense. A thousand or more sites per quad CPU system with 4GB RAM and a 6 disk RAID array... that's probably about common for the larger hosts.

    Now, when it comes to VPS, the return isn't as great. For example, in standard shared, 1000 customers paying 10 bucks a month - you'll get 10,000 a month. Since VPS is more resource intensive, There are usually less than 100 virtual servers configured per system, at say, $30 a month. That's a seven-thousand dollar a month difference.

    Now, skip the math lesson... long story short, they use weaker hardware in order to make their money back faster. The tradeoff? In a VPS environment you've got full control over the "system", you don't in a shared enviornment. However, shared environements will usually handle higher bursts better than a VPS environment. There's also a lot of extra resource-charging in a VPS environment that you don't (usually) have in a shared configuration.

    Most users, in my experience, go to a VPS not because they need the additional power (face it, bandwidth and storage limits are rediculous these days), but because they've some sort of custom software package the hosting shop doesn't wish to support that won't be installed on a shared system.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts