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

VPS Benchmarking – Cloudfanatic, DigitalOcean, Linode, Vultr

blog.aawadia.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 63 posts

Re: VPS Benchmarking – Cloudfanatic, DigitalOcean, Linode, Vultr

#41

Post by icelight »

capableweb wrote: post #33
Macha wrote: post #29

> Linode had the slowest cpus at just under 2Ghz Uhh, a statement like this somewhat hurts the ability to trust the other claims of the benchmark. Sure, Linode has the lowest clock speed, but you're comparing Epyc Milan which is almost a decade newer than the Sandy-Bridge EP of Cloudfanatic for example. Unsurprisingly, this is even reflected in the one cpu benchmark run, geekbench, which Linode comes first in.

> Uhh, a statement like this somewhat hurts the ability to trust the other claims of the benchmark. Why? > Sure, Linode has the lowest clock speed, but you're comparing Epyc Milan which is almost a decade newer than the Sandy-Bridge EP of Cloudfanatic for example. Sure, but also take into consideration that the Linode instance costs $48/month while the Cloudfanatic one costs $18/month. Both of them have the same amou…

> Seems like this is a Linode problem of offering old hardware, instead of a problem with the benchmark itself.

Linode has the newest hardware, and the highest single- and multi-core speeds despite the lowest clocks. Mentioning the higher clock speeds instead of the benchmarks is pointless and very misleading.

Re: VPS Benchmarking – Cloudfanatic, DigitalOcean, Linode, Vultr

#42

Post by denotational »

capableweb wrote: post #33
Macha wrote: post #29

> Linode had the slowest cpus at just under 2Ghz Uhh, a statement like this somewhat hurts the ability to trust the other claims of the benchmark. Sure, Linode has the lowest clock speed, but you're comparing Epyc Milan which is almost a decade newer than the Sandy-Bridge EP of Cloudfanatic for example. Unsurprisingly, this is even reflected in the one cpu benchmark run, geekbench, which Linode comes first in.

> Uhh, a statement like this somewhat hurts the ability to trust the other claims of the benchmark. Why? > Sure, Linode has the lowest clock speed, but you're comparing Epyc Milan which is almost a decade newer than the Sandy-Bridge EP of Cloudfanatic for example. Sure, but also take into consideration that the Linode instance costs $48/month while the Cloudfanatic one costs $18/month. Both of them have the same amou…

> Why?

I’m not the GP, but I agree with the sentiment.

Clock speed alone is a spectacularly bad metric to use for a summary result regarding relative performance of different CPUs.

If one wants to assess performance on a workload of integer addition/subtraction with a linear chain of data dependencies on a working set that fits in the L1, then sure, clock speed will correlate strongly with performance (in practically every metric other than maybe power).

On the other hand the performance of a lot of real-world workloads will be influenced by things like the number of execution units per core, the types of operations they perform, the throughput of various instructions, the specifics of the front end (e.g. assuming x86/CISC, the types of uops; the size of the BTB; the branch-prediction algorithm), the size of the various caches (TLBs in addition to I$ and D$), the specifics of the coherency protocol, the memory bandwidth, etc.

All that to say that CPUs should be compared by benchmark results, not blind comparisons of clock speed, and so to quote clock speed in a summary might lead one to question the rest of the results.

Re: VPS Benchmarking – Cloudfanatic, DigitalOcean, Linode, Vultr

#43

Post by pleoxy »

this_was_posted wrote: post #31
berkle4455 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hetzner was likely excluded because they have a habit of preventing signups, randomly banning accounts, or blackholing traffic exactly when your app is taking off because their shitty tech thinks your system was compromised or under a DDOS attack.

Is this anecdotal or based on widespread publicly available evidence? Not meant as an accusation, but it’s the first time I’m hearing this and it’s slightly alarming

Can confirm hearing similar reports various places. OCI has a similar rep.

Really rough when you get rug pulled by your provider.

Re: VPS Benchmarking – Cloudfanatic, DigitalOcean, Linode, Vultr

#44

Post by MassiveBonk51 »

kazanz wrote: post #14
kingofheroes wrote: post #3

Are they all just AWS resellers?

It’s actually the opposite. AWS will run on top of other hosting providers for some services and regions. That’s why you’re paying so much for AWS.

Doesn't AWS have its own infrastructure? Why would they run on top of other hosting providers?

Re: VPS Benchmarking – Cloudfanatic, DigitalOcean, Linode, Vultr

#45

Post by kiwijamo »

kazanz wrote: post #14
kingofheroes wrote: post #3

Are they all just AWS resellers?

It’s actually the opposite. AWS will run on top of other hosting providers for some services and regions. That’s why you’re paying so much for AWS.

I pay far less for AWS than I ever did for the providers in this article. Clearly YMMV depending on your workload and also how well you optimise for a cloud providers strengths. Hence making broad statements is unhelpful. There's a place for AWS/GC/Azure, and also for the likes of Vultr/Do and also for rolling your own. It all depends on what you need to achieve. There's no one size fits all.

Re: VPS Benchmarking – Cloudfanatic, DigitalOcean, Linode, Vultr

#47

Post by distortionfield »

woofcat wrote: post #46

The pricing here always confused me. I thought VPS's were supposed to be cheaper than hardware. At $50+/month you're into dedicated pricing in my mind.

Gone are the days where a $5 server can do anything but run a static site

Re: VPS Benchmarking – Cloudfanatic, DigitalOcean, Linode, Vultr

#48

Post by qeternity »

distortionfield wrote: post #47
woofcat wrote: post #46

The pricing here always confused me. I thought VPS's were supposed to be cheaper than hardware. At $50+/month you're into dedicated pricing in my mind.

Gone are the days where a $5 server can do anything but run a static site

What? Hetzner will sell you a 1c / 2gb instance for $5/mo and you can do an incredible amount with that. 99% of people’s side projects can run on that. Hell, plenty of startups could run on that.

Re: VPS Benchmarking – Cloudfanatic, DigitalOcean, Linode, Vultr

#49

Post by distortionfield »

qeternity wrote: post #48
distortionfield wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gone are the days where a $5 server can do anything but run a static site

What? Hetzner will sell you a 1c / 2gb instance for $5/mo and you can do an incredible amount with that. 99% of people’s side projects can run on that. Hell, plenty of startups could run on that.

YMMV, but this doesn’t pass the smell test for me. modest sized projects will freeze a $5 droplet during an install and build for me. I’ve tried across multiple providers. DigitalOcean, Linode, and Vultr. Tried all of them, and a $5 droplet can’t handle anything but a static site IMO. I don’t disagree a startup can go far on a small droplet but inflation has made $5 droplets too slow to be useful IME.

Re: VPS Benchmarking – Cloudfanatic, DigitalOcean, Linode, Vultr

#50

Post by ahofmann »

distortionfield wrote: post #49
qeternity wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? Hetzner will sell you a 1c / 2gb instance for $5/mo and you can do an incredible amount with that. 99% of people’s side projects can run on that. Hell, plenty of startups could run on that.

YMMV, but this doesn’t pass the smell test for me. modest sized projects will freeze a $5 droplet during an install and build for me. I’ve tried across multiple providers. DigitalOcean, Linode, and Vultr. Tried all of them, and a $5 droplet can’t handle anything but a static site IMO. I don’t disagree a startup can go far on a small droplet but inflation has made $5 droplets too slow to be useful IME.

A $5 instance runs almost any php stack just fine. Even if they have a build process.
Post reply on HN