Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

C2: Affordable X86-64 Servers

blog.scaleway.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 231 posts

Re: C2: Affordable X86-64 Servers

#151

Post by vruiz »

nonuby wrote: post #52

A real x86/64 bare metal server for ~ us$3.30/mo inclusive, wow, it seems like only yesterday people were drooling at $99/mo 300mhz Cobalt RAQs at ev1servers (it was more like 15yrs ago). I was able to spin one up in <1min however I was previously registered at scaleway due to their last offering.

Indeed, I remember perfectly well how "die of success" was a thing when sites that became popular could not keep up with the hosting costs.

Re: C2: Affordable X86-64 Servers

#152

Post by sspiff »

earlz wrote: post #135

Their support isn't great, and they're only in Canada and EU, but Kimsufi[1] is my goto for beefy but cheap dedicated servers. Their cheapest offering is $5/month for an Atom, 2G RAM, and 500G harddrive. But where the value really lies is a step up to about $25 where you start getting non-Atom processors, 16+G of RAM, and 1+TB harddrives. Also free bandwidth. It's a real dedicated server so you can install whatever o…

Why would you need KVM access, you can activate their rescue image to boot from, which allows you to mount your hard drive and inspect the system?

Re: C2: Affordable X86-64 Servers

#153

Post by vmorgulis »

david-given wrote: post #106
networked wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please run nbench [1]. I ran it on the C1 in April 2015 and got the following results: CPU : 4 CPU L2 Cache : OS : Linux 3.2.34-29 C compiler : gcc version 4.8.2 (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.8.2-19ubuntu1) libc : libc-2.19.so MEMORY INDEX : 5.859 INTEGER INDEX : 8.164 FLOATING-POINT INDEX: 5.770 For comparison, here are an Intel Atom N450, a Core 2 Duo L7500 and a Raspberry Pi 1 Model B: CPU : Dual GenuineIntel Intel(R) Atom(TM)…

Just for the lulz, here is nbench running on my Asus Chromebook Flip. ==============================LINUX DATA BELOW=============================== CPU : 4 CPU ARMv7 Processor rev 1 (v7l) L2 Cache : OS : Linux 3.14.0 C compiler : gcc version 5.2.1 20151028 (Debian 5.2.1-23) libc : libc-2.21.so MEMORY INDEX : 15.111 INTEGER INDEX : 14.374 FLOATING-POINT INDEX: 18.785

Very cool!

Here is mine (desktop PC from 2011):

    ==============================LINUX DATA BELOW===============================
    CPU                 : 4 CPU GenuineIntel Intel(R) Core(TM) i3 CPU         540  @ 3.07GHz 3059MHz
    L2 Cache            : 4096 KB
    OS                  : Linux 4.3.0-1-amd64
    C compiler          : gcc version 5.3.1 20160224 (Debian 5.3.1-10) 
    libc                : 
    MEMORY INDEX        : 37.273
    INTEGER INDEX       : 25.801
    FLOATING-POINT INDEX: 47.882

Re: C2: Affordable X86-64 Servers

#156

Post by lisper »

zx2c4 wrote: post #33
lazyjones wrote: post #11

Avotons are very slow, an 8C SoC will typically be slower than an 8 year old 2C desktop CPU (I ran Go builds as a benchmark on my own 2.4 GHz C2750 vs. a 2008 iMac with 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo). As for Scaleway, some people seem to like it very much, but I found their policy about spamming their users problematic. They (online.net) mock you at registration with a sleazy checked and disabled box for receiving spam ("produc…

> I doubt that Just tried for a few minutes all 3 of them. The C2S is a C2550, and the C2M and C2L are C2750. They each appear to be bare metal, and not virtualized. The VPS offering, which is advertised as a VPS, appears to be virtualized inside of a C2750. The C1 is a Marvell Armada 370/XP, a bare metal ARMv7l board. > I would consider their offers "ad-supported". This also is not my experience. I haven't ever rece…

> They each appear to be bare metal, and not virtualized

How can you tell?

Re: C2: Affordable X86-64 Servers

#157

Post by yyin »

LogicX wrote: post #104

I've been very pleased with http://packet.net and their typo 0 server. It's bare metal, but much more performant than here. They have an amazing network, it's by the hour, and it's Also they're based in the US, so less latency for those of us with primary customer bases here. We use them at DNSFilter in NYC as part of our anycast network, for the last two months. Looking forward to their San Jose and Amsterdam datace…

Why do you use http://packet.net as a URL in your comment when this only redirects to a www.packet.net subdomain, on Cloudflare?

Why not just use http://www.packet.net?

From the perspective of the user, wouldn't it be "more performant" to skip the gratuitous redirect, extra GET request and DNS lookups?

Maybe this is just marketing? Setting referrer, cookies? Fear of a thundering herd arising from an HN comment? Inadvertence? I don't understand.

Apologies for being so naive.

Re: C2: Affordable X86-64 Servers

#159

Post by gravypod »

Using this for a remote backup server would be cool. Start the server, copy over backup, take their "storage snapshot", and turn off the server.

Lets do some napkin math: (In USD)

  - $0.01/hr USD
  - 10hr of backups each day (Heavy Usage)
  - 10 cents/day, $3/month, $36/year
You can also take snapshots. So that's extra cool.

Edit: Calculations for 150GB storage instances:

  - €0.01/hr (@ 150GB of storage)
  - 20hr of backups each day (Heavy Usage and more data transferred)
  - $0.24/day, $7.27/month, $87.29/year
Just did these for my own needs so thought everyone else might enjoy having them too.

Re: C2: Affordable X86-64 Servers

#160

Post by smarx007 »

tluyben2 wrote: post #6

Invite only.... So you cannot even get them. What's the use of this announcement?

So that existing customers* (who will have higher retention rates) could order them before they become "victims of their success".

* I am one of them, but would really appreciate Scaleway to accept people that have invited faster.

Post reply on HN