2019 Personal Top VPS Providers
After a year on LET and finally LES, its been a good learning journey so far on VPS in general. Even better to find a few enthusiastic hobbyists whom I can continue to download new information from.
This list is formed predominantly by quad-benchmarking (bench, nench, fio,geekbench), with a personal evaluation on triangle of performance: CPU, IO, Network
So apart from numbers crunching, the VPS needs to have some better than average connectivity (also evaluated based on personal experience).
The list is in no order of ranking, they are all preferred and (mostly) in use.
**Avoro**
vServer Winter Promotion 2019
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14993051
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CPU model : Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6140 CPU @ 2.30GHz
Number of cores : 2
CPU frequency : 2299.998 MHz
Total size of Disk : 30.5 GB (8.7 GB Used)
Total amount of Mem : 5949 MB (830 MB Used)
Total amount of Swap : 1023 MB (0 MB Used)
System uptime : 6 days, 11 hour 44 min
Load average : 0.19, 0.12, 0.04
OS : CentOS 7.7.1908
Arch : x86_64 (64 Bit)
Kernel : 5.4.5-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I/O speed(1st run) : 723 MB/s
I/O speed(2nd run) : 958 MB/s
I/O speed(3rd run) : 964 MB/s
Average I/O speed : 881.7 MB/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Node Name IPv4 address Download Speed
CacheFly 205.234.175.175 106MB/s
Linode, Tokyo2, JP 139.162.65.37 8.86MB/s
Linode, Singapore, SG 139.162.23.4 13.9MB/s
Linode, London, UK 176.58.107.39 134MB/s
Linode, Frankfurt, DE 139.162.130.8 304MB/s
Linode, Fremont, CA 50.116.14.9 15.4MB/s
Softlayer, Dallas, TX 173.192.68.18 15.3MB/s
Softlayer, Seattle, WA 67.228.112.250 12.1MB/s
Softlayer, Frankfurt, DE 159.122.69.4 107MB/s
Softlayer, Singapore, SG 119.81.28.170 11.0MB/s
Softlayer, HongKong, CN 119.81.130.170 6.96MB/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CPU: SHA256-hashing 500 MB
1.678 seconds
CPU: bzip2-compressing 500 MB
5.680 seconds
CPU: AES-encrypting 500 MB
1.167 seconds
ioping: seek rate
min/avg/max/mdev = 84.9 us / 293.3 us / 16.5 ms / 466.6 us
ioping: sequential read speed
generated 8.41 k requests in 5.00 s, 2.05 GiB, 1.68 k iops, 420.4 MiB/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[root@cybertech fio-2.0.9]# ./fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=4k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=75
test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=64
fio-2.0.9
Starting 1 process
test: Laying out IO file(s) (1 file(s) / 4096MB)
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [100.0% done] [217.2M/74645K /s] [55.9K/18.7K iops] [eta 00m:00s]
test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=279327: Thu Dec 26 10:13:02 2019
read : io=3071.2MB, bw=240058KB/s, iops=**60014 **, runt= 13104msec
write: io=1024.4MB, bw=80020KB/s, iops=**20004 **, runt= 13104msec
cpu : usr=12.32%, sys=46.46%, ctx=37221, majf=0, minf=5
IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=100.0%
submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
issued : total=r=786431/w=262145/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0
Run status group 0 (all jobs):
READ: io=3071.2MB, aggrb=240058KB/s, minb=240058KB/s, maxb=240058KB/s, mint=13104msec, maxt=13104msec
WRITE: io=1024.4MB, aggrb=80019KB/s, minb=80019KB/s, maxb=80019KB/s, mint=13104msec, maxt=13104msec
Disk stats (read/write):
vda: ios=777603/259222, merge=0/0, ticks=418387/184379, in_queue=123965, util=93.89%
----------------------------------------------------------------------
**PHP-Friends**
vserver schnupperspecial 2019
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14900606
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CPU model : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2630 v4 @ 2.20GHz
Number of cores : 2
CPU frequency : 2199.998 MHz
Total size of Disk : 65.0 GB (10.0 GB Used)
Total amount of Mem : 5948 MB (756 MB Used)
Total amount of Swap : 0 MB (0 MB Used)
System uptime : 1 days, 15 hour 32 min
Load average : 0.25, 0.08, 0.02
OS : CentOS 7.7.1908
Arch : x86_64 (64 Bit)
Kernel : 5.4.6-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I/O speed(1st run) : 1.5 GB/s
I/O speed(2nd run) : 1.4 GB/s
I/O speed(3rd run) : 1.4 GB/s
Average I/O speed : 1467.7 MB/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Node Name IPv4 address Download Speed
CacheFly 205.234.175.175 105MB/s
Linode, Tokyo2, JP 139.162.65.37 6.83MB/s
Linode, Singapore, SG 139.162.23.4 8.00MB/s
Linode, London, UK 176.58.107.39 81.2MB/s
Linode, Frankfurt, DE 139.162.130.8 96.6MB/s
Linode, Fremont, CA 50.116.14.9 8.28MB/s
Softlayer, Dallas, TX 173.192.68.18 13.7MB/s
Softlayer, Seattle, WA 67.228.112.250 10.9MB/s
Softlayer, Frankfurt, DE 159.122.69.4 88.6MB/s
Softlayer, Singapore, SG 119.81.28.170 9.04MB/s
Softlayer, HongKong, CN 119.81.130.170 6.70MB/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CPU: SHA256-hashing 500 MB
2.211 seconds
CPU: bzip2-compressing 500 MB
7.179 seconds
CPU: AES-encrypting 500 MB
1.978 seconds
ioping: seek rate
min/avg/max/mdev = 108.9 us / 252.1 us / 23.3 ms / 487.3 us
ioping: sequential read speed
generated 8.96 k requests in 5.00 s, 2.19 GiB, 1.79 k iops, 447.8 MiB/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[root@cybertech fio-2.0.9]# ./fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=4k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=75
test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=64
fio-2.0.9
Starting 1 process
test: Laying out IO file(s) (1 file(s) / 4096MB)
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [100.0% done] [248.2M/85426K /s] [63.6K/21.4K iops] [eta 00m:00s]
test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=17219: Thu Dec 26 10:29:14 2019
read : io=3070.1MB, bw=218726KB/s, iops=**54681 **, runt= 14377msec
write: io=1025.8MB, bw=73011KB/s, iops=**18252 **, runt= 14377msec
cpu : usr=10.67%, sys=58.35%, ctx=130288, majf=0, minf=4
IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=100.0%
submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
issued : total=r=786156/w=262420/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0
Run status group 0 (all jobs):
READ: io=3070.1MB, aggrb=218726KB/s, minb=218726KB/s, maxb=218726KB/s, mint=14377msec, maxt=14377msec
WRITE: io=1025.8MB, aggrb=73011KB/s, minb=73011KB/s, maxb=73011KB/s, mint=14377msec, maxt=14377msec
Disk stats (read/write):
vda: ios=778402/259815, merge=0/0, ticks=377079/125283, in_queue=170719, util=92.46%
----------------------------------------------------------------------
**Letbox**
BBox NVMe2
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13188969
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CPU model : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 0 @ 2.90GHz
Number of cores : 2
CPU frequency : 2899.998 MHz
Total size of Disk : 523.0 GB (201.9 GB Used)
Total amount of Mem : 1993 MB (1184 MB Used)
Total amount of Swap : 92 MB (92 MB Used)
System uptime : 52 days, 15 hour 34 min
Load average : 0.03, 0.01, 0.00
OS : Ubuntu 18.04.3 LTS
Arch : x86_64 (64 Bit)
Kernel : 4.15.0-65-generic
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I/O speed(1st run) : 1.1 GB/s
I/O speed(2nd run) : 1.2 GB/s
I/O speed(3rd run) : 1.1 GB/s
Average I/O speed : 1160.5 MB/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Node Name IPv4 address Download Speed
CacheFly 205.234.175.175 101MB/s
Linode, Tokyo2, JP 139.162.65.37 19.7MB/s
Linode, Singapore, SG 139.162.23.4 14.0MB/s
Linode, London, UK 176.58.107.39 18.0MB/s
Linode, Frankfurt, DE 139.162.130.8 15.9MB/s
Linode, Fremont, CA 50.116.14.9 112MB/s
Softlayer, Dallas, TX 173.192.68.18 69.0MB/s
Softlayer, Seattle, WA 67.228.112.250 67.7MB/s
Softlayer, Frankfurt, DE 159.122.69.4 10.8MB/s
Softlayer, Singapore, SG 119.81.28.170 10.6MB/s
Softlayer, HongKong, CN 119.81.130.170 13.7MB/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CPU: SHA256-hashing 500 MB
3.496 seconds
CPU: bzip2-compressing 500 MB
5.533 seconds
CPU: AES-encrypting 500 MB
1.596 seconds
ioping: seek rate
min/avg/max/mdev = 91.7 us / 179.7 us / 3.02 ms / 40.7 us
ioping: sequential read speed
generated 12.1 k requests in 5.00 s, 2.94 GiB, 2.41 k iops, 602.8 MiB/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------
root@labox:~/fio-2.0.9# ./fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=4k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=75
test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=64
fio-2.0.9
Starting 1 process
test: Laying out IO file(s) (1 file(s) / 4096MB)
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [100.0% done] [289.2M/98180K /s] [74.3K/24.6K iops] [eta 00m:00s]
test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=6387: Wed Dec 25 19:37:29 2019
read : io=3073.4MB, bw=245028KB/s, iops=**61257 **, runt= 12844msec
write: io=1022.7MB, bw=81529KB/s, iops=**20382 **, runt= 12844msec
cpu : usr=14.97%, sys=59.54%, ctx=17696, majf=0, minf=4
IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=100.0%
submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
issued : total=r=786786/w=261790/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0
Run status group 0 (all jobs):
READ: io=3073.4MB, aggrb=245028KB/s, minb=245028KB/s, maxb=245028KB/s, mint=12844msec, maxt=12844msec
WRITE: io=1022.7MB, aggrb=81529KB/s, minb=81529KB/s, maxb=81529KB/s, mint=12844msec, maxt=12844msec
Disk stats (read/write):
vda: ios=786616/261632, merge=0/8, ticks=461844/121448, in_queue=576704, util=99.24%
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
Comments
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
That NexusBytes one.... Damn
And, why Inception Hosting one reports so much low IO? Is it cache? raid?
https://phpbackend.com/
Your results on Nexus Bytes is similar to mine, so it is good to have confirmation on my results (I am not releasing mine yet because I intend to collect about 30 days of data, and I am only halfway there).
For fio, I suggest you add higher block sizes to compare. The IOPS drop can be very dramatic at higher block sizes, which in my view gives a better view of disk performance because it is quite easy to have inflated IOPS with caching at 4k block sizes. In addition to 4k, I do 64k and 256k (basically 16 and 64 times the data load that has to be processed).
Deals and Reviews: LowEndBoxes Review | Avoid dodgy providers with The LEBRE Whitelist | Free hosting (with conditions): Evolution-Host, NanoKVM, FreeMach, ServedEZ | Get expert copyediting and copywriting help at The Write Flow
CyberDuck runs bench on cron! The Benchie (bench junkie Haha)
Thanks dude. Appreciate you even putting us next to all the big boys
@cybertech Boss, on a completely unrelated note, how many servers/vps are in your position right now?
Nexus Bytes Ryzen Powered NVMe VPS | NYC|Miami|LA|London|Netherlands| Singapore|Tokyo
Storage VPS | LiteSpeed Powered Web Hosting + SSH access | Switcher Special |
Avoro seems to be the best :0
They have pretty good write IOPS actually. however DD not so much although it is debated often that it is not the correct way to test I/O especially for NVMe. That being said I do intend to make a ticket about it once the holidays are over, which may or may not impact these benches.
I am not proficient in how fio works, is 64 / 256K also relevant in actual usage as well? if so i'll make the test too
quack quack! Boss, including one that has not been provisioned yet, I have 14 including yours
overall on my list, yes
also depends on what you want. speed wise nothing beats the ryzens
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
Well, 4k block size is quite small, and if you really want to stress the disk, a higher block size will show its capacity to transfer large blocks of data quickly.
An imperfect analogy but it is like testing how fast a person can move bricks. Being able to move small bricks very quickly is good, but how much does the person slow down when the brick becomes 16 times the weight of the original or 64 times? If the drop in speed is much lower than the increase in weight, you can have more confidence that the person is a higher performer.
This is why I also test with much larger block size to get an idea of how well the disk performs under heavy load situations. Most SSDs and NVMes have no problems performing with 4k block sizes. All the numbers are usually impressive. The difference starts coming in with higher block sizes. You can try them to see the difference. NVMe generally maintains very good IOPS at 256k compared to SSDs.
Deals and Reviews: LowEndBoxes Review | Avoid dodgy providers with The LEBRE Whitelist | Free hosting (with conditions): Evolution-Host, NanoKVM, FreeMach, ServedEZ | Get expert copyediting and copywriting help at The Write Flow
TBH i copied the test parameters from binarylane, which i trusted they would give a good insight on how to test fio.
and thanks for using the brick analogy. being a brick myself it is now much more understandable.
my question is what is the most common brick size that is usually being moved? i would then formulate my tests in future using this one.
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
@cybertech this is the command I use:
You can use the same command but instead of
--bs=4k, you can change it to either--bs=64kor--bs=256k. If you want to torture the disk, use 512k or even 1024k.The binary lane code uses mixed random read-write of 75% read and 25% write
--rwmixread=75. This is somewhat real-world enough, but my command uses 50-50 mixed random read-write--rwmixread=50.The other flags you don't really need to touch, but --bs and --rwmixread you can tweak to match your scenario. Hope I managed to help you better understand fio to have better tests for your use cases.
Deals and Reviews: LowEndBoxes Review | Avoid dodgy providers with The LEBRE Whitelist | Free hosting (with conditions): Evolution-Host, NanoKVM, FreeMach, ServedEZ | Get expert copyediting and copywriting help at The Write Flow
You can also check the commands that ServerScope uses. It does several fio tests.
Daniel15 | https://d.sb/. List of all my VPSes: https://d.sb/servers
dnstools.ws - DNS lookups, pings, and traceroutes from 30 locations worldwide.
Just tried this from inception hosting:
root@cybertech fio-2.0.9]# fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=64k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=50-bash: fio: command not found
[root@cybertech fio-2.0.9]# ./fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=64k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=50
test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=64K-64K/64K-64K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=64
fio-2.0.9
Starting 1 process
test: Laying out IO file(s) (1 file(s) / 4096MB)
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [17.6% done] [114.8M/112.8M /s] [1835 /1803 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [23.5% done] [111.1M/111.6M /s] [1790 /1785 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [29.4% done] [111.8M/113.6M /s] [1788 /1816 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [33.3% done] [80559K/81262K /s] [1258 /1269 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [38.9% done] [121.4M/114.5M /s] [1941 /1831 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [44.4% done] [131.7M/136.3M /s] [2105 /2179 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [52.9% done] [135.3M/136.3M /s] [2163 /2179 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [58.8% done] [133.1M/132.6M /s] [2142 /2120 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [64.7% done] [130.2M/128.6M /s] [2095 /2055 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [70.6% done] [133.1M/131.9M /s] [2142 /2108 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [76.5% done] [82989K/84459K /s] [1296 /1319 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [82.4% done] [99257K/100.2M /s] [1550 /1601 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [83.3% done] [82221K/87464K /s] [1284 /1366 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [88.9% done] [94049K/99804K /s] [1469 /1559 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [94.4% done] [110.1M/109.3M /s] [1775 /1748 iops] [eta 00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m] [100.0% done] [128.9M/130.6M /s] [2061 /2088 iops] [eta 00m:00s]
test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=2924: Thu Dec 26 16:19:39 2019
read : io=2043.7MB, bw=116467KB/s, iops=1819 , runt= 17968msec
write: io=2052.4MB, bw=116965KB/s, iops=1827 , runt= 17968msec
cpu : usr=1.42%, sys=5.68%, ctx=29418, majf=0, minf=4
IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=99.9% submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
issued : total=r=32698/w=32838/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0
Run status group 0 (all jobs):
READ: io=2043.7MB, aggrb=116466KB/s, minb=116466KB/s, maxb=116466KB/s, mint=17968msec, maxt=17968msec
WRITE: io=2052.4MB, aggrb=116965KB/s, minb=116965KB/s, maxb=116965KB/s, mint=17968msec, maxt=17968msec
Disk stats (read/write):
vda: ios=32554/32727, merge=0/0, ticks=1073261/56669, in_queue=1102262, util=45.49%
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
@cybertech it is a bit messy to read, so I will extract the lines to look out for from your earlier Inception KVM and the one you just posted:
These was from your previously posted results using 4k block size and 75% read 25% write parameters:
The results from your just posted results using 64k block size and 50-50 read-write operations:
You can now see that the impressive iops numbers dropped drastically. When the block size went up 16 times to 64k.
I will post one of my results from @seriesn's Germany NVMe fio commands showing the drop in iops as the block size increases from 4k to 64k to 256k so that you get a better idea of what the numbers mean.
NexusBytes Germany NVMe fio 4k random read-write (50-50)
NexusBytes Germany NVMe fio 64k random read-write (50-50)
NexusBytes Germany NVMe fio 256k random read-write (50-50)
See how the iops dropped only by a factor of 8 from 4k to 256k although the block size increased 64 times? If you look at the drop from 4k to 64k, it is only a factor of about 1.5.
This is expected of NVMe (otherwise you should ask for your money back), although this is one of the more impressive NVMe I have tested (others were excellent but @seriesn's stuff is mindblowing).
Deals and Reviews: LowEndBoxes Review | Avoid dodgy providers with The LEBRE Whitelist | Free hosting (with conditions): Evolution-Host, NanoKVM, FreeMach, ServedEZ | Get expert copyediting and copywriting help at The Write Flow
Jesus! Dial 1800-Server-Additction. You are a benchie ?
Nexus Bytes Ryzen Powered NVMe VPS | NYC|Miami|LA|London|Netherlands| Singapore|Tokyo
Storage VPS | LiteSpeed Powered Web Hosting + SSH access | Switcher Special |
To justify my addiction I have one production one hot backup one test environment one direct play Plex one transcoding Plex
Ok run out of ideas for the 9 remaining
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
Backup of production. Backup of that. Backup configuration of that. Replicate with any cast dns and rsync and you get a poor man's cloud with the rest
Nexus Bytes Ryzen Powered NVMe VPS | NYC|Miami|LA|London|Netherlands| Singapore|Tokyo
Storage VPS | LiteSpeed Powered Web Hosting + SSH access | Switcher Special |
Just did a fresh reinstall of inception hosting VPS and it seems the NVMe is back up at speed:
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
Looks like you and I are on the same level of addiction. I have put most of my idlers to work to justify their existence, even if that work is just running tmux and htop :-)
Neat idea with 2 plex servers, although that would be a nightmare to keep in sync.
Get the best deal on your next VPS or Shared/Reseller hosting from RacknerdTracker.com - The original aff garden.