Results 1 to 13 of 13
Thread: VPS or Dedi
-
11-24-2006, 05:32 PM #1Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Posts
- 45
VPS or Dedi
I have been looking into VPS as a stepping stone to a dedi box, but looking at the specs of VPSs I wonder if a Dedi would a better long term choice.
I have about 35 sites, most of which use less than a 1Gb of traffic but one that uses 12Gb month and is steadily increasing, this site uses phpBB and mySql as well as ASP for the main site, so I am looking for a VPS/Dedi that can handle ASP, PHP, mySql preferrably with HELM though that is not essential. The other sites that I host use either PHP or ASP.Ask me about my m8y
-
11-24-2006, 05:38 PM #2WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Nov 2004
- Location
- Ashburn, VA
- Posts
- 172
VDSes are a great stepping stone for users with sites that are beginning to take off... In the long run however, they can end up costing much more than a dedicated machine simply because most hosting companies require you to move up the next best VDS plan (which gives you more space, bandwidth, etc.) but you might just need more ram, so you end up paying more for things you don't actually need. My advice would be to try out hosting your sites on a VDS, see what the resource usage is like, and if it's excessive, start looking for a reliable dedicated provider.
Alexander McMillen
President and CEO - Sliqua Enterprise Hosting, Inc. - AS32740
Serving up scale and service since 2002. Is your mission critical?
1-877-4-SLIQUA - http://www.sliqua.com - http://www.isyourmissioncritical.com
-
11-24-2006, 05:51 PM #3Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Location
- London UK
- Posts
- 695
A good VPS done right is better than a low-mid dedicated.
Too many VPS providers however are putting profit before quality.
A good VPS can handle 35 sites without any problems.Ultra High Performance UK VPS without compromise.
HPe servers, Intel NVMe DC P3700/P4600 SSD
https://clustered.net
-
11-24-2006, 08:31 PM #4Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 1,041
Agreed, a decent Linux VPS can outperform many dedicated servers, not to mention the fact that your data on a Linux VPS is most likely sitting on a powerful RAID array, versus a single 80GB drive in your Celeron dedicated box.
If your looking for a Windows VPS -- steer away, Windows VPS hosting is certainly not a "step up" from shared hosting, in fact it's a step down. If your not ready to get a dedicated Win2k3 server, stick with your shared/reseller Windows account.
-Sean
-
11-25-2006, 03:33 PM #5Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Posts
- 45
thanks for the comments all, though seankoons, claiming that Windows VPS is not a 'step-up' requires backing up with facts, I certainly don't see it as a step down provided it is done correctly, which also applies to Linux does it not?
Ask me about my m8y
-
11-25-2006, 03:49 PM #6Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Location
- London UK
- Posts
- 695
Linux is far superior as an OS especially when its a VPS.
Windows on a VPS is something we would not even consider.Ultra High Performance UK VPS without compromise.
HPe servers, Intel NVMe DC P3700/P4600 SSD
https://clustered.net
-
11-25-2006, 05:17 PM #7Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 1,041
Originally Posted by acec
Rebooting hardware nodes every other day or week is not what we're about, so we refuse to now sell a product in which we now know for a FACT we cannot provide 99.9% uptime on -- no matter how much money you throw at these machines, it comes down to just plain sloppy programming on Microsoft's part. Our Linux VPS nodes have uptimes of 50+ days, when a reboot happens you better bet it was planned in 2 weeks in advance, and there was a damn good reason -- not the case with Windows!
Ofcourse, this is all just my companies experience with Windows VPS's, your mileage may differ. But consider this, the entire hosting market has Windows VPS's at a price tag of $70+ USD, for pathetic resources (256MB, 10GB space, 200GB bandwidth). That's insane. We refuse to sell a VPS product that comes that close to the price of a dedicated machine, it just does not make sense. So that's why I say, if you need Windows that badly, either stick with Shared hosting or get yourself a dedicated Win2k3 server.
-Sean
-
11-25-2006, 10:13 PM #8Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Posts
- 55
Good VPS gives you almost as much CPU speed as dedicated, so I vote for VPS. Although, there are some dedicated for the same price as more expensive VPS.
VPS related information at : Cheap VPS and VPS deals, coupons , discounts and promo codes .
-
12-03-2006, 09:09 AM #9Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Posts
- 45
thanks for your insight sean, much appreiated
Ask me about my m8y
-
12-03-2006, 10:57 AM #10Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 1,041
Originally Posted by acec
Also, keep in mind this has just been our personal experience with Virtuozzo for Windows, and you can hear very good things about it from different companies. Remember, your mileage may vary.
-Sean
-
12-03-2006, 11:16 AM #11Web Hosting Evangelist
- Join Date
- Jun 2001
- Location
- Gilroy CA.
- Posts
- 468
Sean, you guys should really consider bigger VPS solutions. Adding maybe 768m and 1gb VPS options.
When looking at VPS there are issues to consider. If you get 512 megs you aren't paying for kernel space and disk buffers. so compared to dedicated 512 a VPS gives you more memory. And because it's a shared box they are going to go to more trouble to keep it running, secure, and backed up. If you buy a cheap box with one hard drive and no backup and you lose the hard drive, you're screwed. Also on a VPS if you are running stuff off hours you probably have a lot more processing power to work with.
The down side is that VPS can be oversold and that other users can slow things down. The memory limit tends to be more of a hard limit than just hitting swap like on a dedicated box.
From what I see if you are thinking in terms of not needing a mighty box then VPS can be about 1/2 the cost of dedicated and a better deal. I don't know of anyone selling 4gb vps servers though so it's not something you want to run Spam Assassin on for a big email operation. MySQL can be either slow or a memory hog is not configured right.
-
12-03-2006, 11:31 AM #12Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 1,041
Originally Posted by mperkel
-Sean
-
12-03-2006, 11:54 AM #13Web Hosting Evangelist
- Join Date
- Jun 2001
- Location
- Gilroy CA.
- Posts
- 468
You might also create a web page for sizing VPS needs with example usages. For example, if you had 500 domains that was all static content then it takes a far smaller server than one that has one domain with heave traffic and a MySQL backend. For a lot of people 256 megs is plenty. For others 512 isn't enough.