Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1

    Arrow What would be a better choice for me?

    Im debating on either getting a pretty good VPS or a cheap dedicated server!

    This will be used to run a forum with 5-15 users online at a time and bunch of free hosted sites.

    Here are my two options:

    VPS Option:
    VPS will be on a Dual Core Dual Xeon 3.0GHz, 16GB Ram, 300x2 GB SCSI RAID 1 Dell PowerEdge Server!

    20 GB of Space
    350 GB of Bandwidth
    384 MB of Guaranteed Ram
    768 MB of Burstable Ram


    Dedicated Server Option:

    Intel Celeron 2.0 GHz
    256 KB Cache/266 MHz FSB
    1024 MB DDR SDRAM
    80 GB SATA Hard Drive
    10 Mbps Switch Port
    1000 GB Data Transfer

    Which one would be faster, and better for me?

    Thanks

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    20
    At 5-15 users at one time, your forum is very small. You could really do this on a regular hosting account. However if you are set on a VPS or dedicated, I would go with a quality VPS from a reliable company. The 'cheapo' dedicated servers are almost never a smart idea if you want a reliable network or good support.
    ** ByteFortress Technologies ** - Instant Setup Remote Backup Solutions
    ===== Encrypted Remote Backup Solutions with Instant Setup =====
    ** TheByteShack.com ** - 'Gimmick-less' High Performance Webhosting Solutions.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,493
    I'd most likely recommend the VPS solution mainly due to the fact that a celeron with a 256kb cache won't do much for you. Especially if you don't know how to manage it yourself.

    5-15 users is next to nothing and just adding in a few small sites should suit the VPS enviroment.
    GeeksGather - Undergoing redevelopment. Stand by.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,446
    If you go with a quality hosting provider (do some research) then you should be able to serve your forum just fine and have plenty of room to grow. Although, if you are worried about oversold servers/lack of resources or you need a custom configuration (ie. custom php configs/apache modules) then I would recommend a minimal VPS.
    FiberPeer.Com | | REAL DDoS Protection | Cloud Hosting | VPS | Dedicated Servers | High Bandwidth Hosting | 1Gbps-10Gbps Unmetered
    FiberPeer DDoS Mitigation | ethProxy Upgraded! | 14-Years Experience | Emergency 24/7 Support
    Visit us @ www.fiberpeer.com

  5. #5
    The problem is that I am a free web host, and I host over 300 sites. So I need the space, and if I keep upgrading the reseller's account, it will be more expensive than VPS.

    Thanks

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,080
    It's going to be quite hard moving from a reseller too vps/dediated with 300 sites.

    I would take the celeron, it will do much better than that vps.
    VPSFuze.com - Performance should be noticeable - VPS Hosting at its best.
    HostingFuze.com - Affordable & Reliable Shared & Master Reseller hosting services

  7. #7
    Well, it wont be hard moving all the accounts once I get root access at both places.

    But regardless, why would the celeron outperform a VPS on a Dual 3.0Ghz Machine with 12GB of Ram?

    Thanks

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,080
    Well,

    Personally I think the server would do you better. The vps machine may have 12GB ram but you don't get full access to it. I believe that dedicated would out perform in specs and speed.
    VPSFuze.com - Performance should be noticeable - VPS Hosting at its best.
    HostingFuze.com - Affordable & Reliable Shared & Master Reseller hosting services

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    WebHostingTalk
    Posts
    16,961
    Quote Originally Posted by SelectByte
    Well,

    Personally I think the server would do you better. The vps machine may have 12GB ram but you don't get full access to it. I believe that dedicated would out perform in specs and speed.
    I agree.

    Plus!, with dedicated server, you are all alone :-)
    Specially 4 You
    .
    JoneSolutions.Com ( Jones.Solutions ) is on the net 24/7 providing stable and reliable web hosting solutions and services since 2001

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Posts
    2,549
    On specs alone you are well worth getting the dedicated server since it will out perform the VPS.

    Since you are not going to be allowed to sustain the burst consistantly, the dedicated server should win hands down.

    -Scott
    Server Management - AdminGeekZ.com
    Infrastructure Management, Web Application Performance, mySQL DBA. System Automation.
    WordPress/Magento Performance, Apache to Nginx Conversion, Varnish Implimentation, DDoS Protection, Custom Nginx Modules
    Check our wordpress varnish plugin. Contact us for quote: [email protected]

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Posts
    6,456
    It depends on your budget. Celerons are junk in my opinion if you are running anything serious. I've ran about 5 ircds and a few mysql apps and I fried one.
    simplywww: directadmin and cpanel hosting that will rock your socks
    Need some work done in a datacenter in the NYC area? NYC Remote Hands can do it.

    Follow my "deals" Twitter for hardware specials.. @dougysdeals

  12. #12
    The VPS and Dedicated Server I mentioned are very similar in price.

    Thanks

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Brighton, MI
    Posts
    1,582
    spend the extra money on a dedicated, preferrably a p4/A64+ system over the celeron. At 300 user accounts it wont be long before you outgrow a vps and have to move again. Might as well bite the bullet and get the dedicated now

  14. #14
    Yeah, thats true. But the 300+ accounts aren't using much space.

    Thanks

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,080
    Quote Originally Posted by alvarez16
    Yeah, thats true. But the 300+ accounts aren't using much space.

    Thanks
    For free hosting, get a celeron. If you plan on putting paid hosting on it, get a minimum of a P4 2.8GHz ~
    VPSFuze.com - Performance should be noticeable - VPS Hosting at its best.
    HostingFuze.com - Affordable & Reliable Shared & Master Reseller hosting services

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,559
    Quote Originally Posted by alvarez16
    Im debating on either getting a pretty good VPS or a cheap dedicated server!

    This will be used to run a forum with 5-15 users online at a time and bunch of free hosted sites.

    Here are my two options:

    VPS Option:
    VPS will be on a Dual Core Dual Xeon 3.0GHz, 16GB Ram, 300x2 GB SCSI RAID 1 Dell PowerEdge Server!

    20 GB of Space
    350 GB of Bandwidth
    384 MB of Guaranteed Ram
    768 MB of Burstable Ram


    Dedicated Server Option:

    Intel Celeron 2.0 GHz
    256 KB Cache/266 MHz FSB
    1024 MB DDR SDRAM
    80 GB SATA Hard Drive
    10 Mbps Switch Port
    1000 GB Data Transfer

    Which one would be faster, and better for me?

    Thanks
    Personally, I'd say go with a small P4 server.

    And overall, a Celeron with that much ram will benchmark higher than the VPS as on that server, they can have 42 accounts all with 384 guaranteed ram.


    Matt
    Matthew Rosenblatt, and I do lots of things.
    Currently a Master Electrician on Broadway.
    My company, BurstAV, specializes in A/V Systems Design and integration.
    I also own ConcertCables. We build power/data cables for the entertainment industry.

  17. #17
    What does the 256 KB Cache/266 MHz FSB mean?

    Also, would a 2.0 Celeron better than an AMD Sempron 64 2800+?

    Thanks

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    3,498
    Quote Originally Posted by alvarez16
    What does the 256 KB Cache/266 MHz FSB mean?

    Also, would a 2.0 Celeron better than an AMD Sempron 64 2800+?

    Thanks
    The Sempron will definitely beat the 2.0 Celeron, Celerons in my opinion are at the bottom of the CPU tree.

    The 256 KB Cache means that you have 256 KB of ultra fast memory directly on the processor to store data that is frequently used from RAM. Generally the more cache you have, the better your server will perform (in most applications). I try to select CPUs with at least 512KB of L2 cache on all my boxes, if not 1MB.


    Alex

  19. #19
    Thanks for answer.

    Also, I know a AMD Athlon 64 2800+ would beat both the Sempron and Celeron, but what would be the equivalent to it on the Intel side?

    Thanks
    Last edited by LayeredZoneHosting; 10-02-2006 at 03:32 PM.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    3,498
    Quote Originally Posted by alvarez16
    Thanks for answer.

    Also, I know a AMD Athlon 64 2800+ would beat both the Sempron and Celeron, but what would be the equivalent to it on the Intel side?

    Thanks
    Probably a P4 2.4 GHz or something around that.


    Alex

Posting Permissions

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