dedicat_server.ro benchmark & review

First, kudos to the dedicate_server.ro people because they provided me with access to both their small KVM and their small server products. Many probably know them from their, uhm, critical remarks in @cociu 's / HostSolutions threads. But, and that's laudable, they didn't just leave it at declaring their superiority but let me benchmark and review their goods.

Front up a declaration of my position in that: I'm on neither side. For me they are both providers with servers in Romania and I have no particular like or dislike of either. I have (since some days) one of HostSolutions storage VPS but that's only due to it's good value for a very low price. I also have a VPS with Virtono, another player on the romanian market. In short, you can be sure that I have no dog in that fight and am guided only by facts and numbers.

Now, let's get started, dedi first. System Info:

Machine: amd64, Arch.: amd64, Model: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU L5630 @ 2.13GHz
OS, version: FreeBSD 12.0, Mem.: 15.974 GB
CPU - Cores: 4, Family/Model/Stepping: 6/44/2
Cache: 32K/32K L1d/L1i, 256K L2, 12M L3
Std. Flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat
pse36 cflsh ds acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss htt tm pbe sse3 pclmulqdq
dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm pcid dca
sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt aes
Ext. Flags: syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm lahf_lm


So, it's an old Westmere Xeon which is not a bad (or uncommon) choice for low end dedis. For users it's OK because it has all the usualy bells and whistles like aes, nx, VT, etc, and for providers it's attractive due to its low power requirements. Unless you have solid reasons to need, say an E-26xx v3, this processor will serve you well for a low price (also in the long run, because guess who's going to pay - or save - on the difference between a 50W and a 120W processor ...).
Btw, note that my test dedi has 16 GB memory, while normally it has 8 GB.

Processor & memory:

Avg Min Max Dmin Dmax D-Span
Single Core: 193.43 193.37 193.48 0.03 0.02 0.06
Multi Core: 806.17 772.62 826.87 4.16 2.57 6.73


Not bad. And as usual when you stress hyperthreading the result is much closer to hw cores than to ht cores. But that it does nicely. The multithreading results correspond indeed to 4 x single core performance (with 8 threads running).

Disk:

Seq.Wr.: 421.73 406.13 433.18 3.7 2.71 6.41
Rnd.Wr: 10.85 10.27 11.28 5.34 3.97 9.31
Seq.Rd: 1391 106.11 3679 92.37 164.4 256.78
Rnd.Rd: 2839 968.59 2949 65.88 3.87 69.76


The disk seems to be solid SSD. Not much to say other than it shows typical SSD results. Nothing to complain about but neither something to write home about.

Network:

GR_UNK: 109 3.1 127.3 97.16 16.79 113.94
US_SJC: 25.72 2.6 31.1 89.89 20.9 110.79
OK_LON: 107.28 6.8 147.1 93.66 37.12 130.78
DE_FRA: 153.12 7.7 205.7 94.97 34.34 129.31
BR_SAO: 19 0 24.8 100 30.49 130.49
FR_PAR: 107.5 6.8 157.8 93.67 46.78 140.46
US_WDC: 33 0 47 100 42.42 142.42
RO_BUC: 847.3 671.4 928.5 20.76 9.58 30.34
AU_MEL: 17.31 3.5 21.5 79.79 24.17 103.96
IT_MIL: 118.92 6 154.5 94.95 29.92 124.87
SG_SGP: 12.49 0.63 29 94.98 132.16 227.14
US_DAL: 30.51 3.3 37.6 89.18 23.24 112.42
RU_MOS: 98.93 89.1 107.9 9.94 9.07 19
JP_TOK: 9.99 0 21.1 100 111.14 211.14
NO_OSL: 66.4 6.6 88.5 90.06 33.29 123.35
IN_CHN: 25.68 7.9 34.5 69.24 34.34 103.58


First, the good news: for a dedi with an official limit of 100 Mb/s it's nice to see some prominent european targets above 100 Mb/s. The RO_BUC result, probably within the DC or anyway very close by, shows that dedicat_server really has good network hardware and config.
The bad news is that while the average results are within what could be called "normal", the Span is really high, meaning that many locations are almost like playing the lottery. You might have a fast connection but you might also have a poor connection.
I'll refrain from writing what I suppose to be the culprit but I'll clearly say that those results are no basis to brag about ones networking prowess, sorry.



Now the KVM VPS. First the system info:

Machine: amd64, Arch.: amd64, Model: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2670 0 @ 2.60GHz
OS, version: FreeBSD 12.0, Mem.: 1.985 GB
CPU - Cores: 1, Family/Model/Stepping: 6/45/7
Cache: 32K/32K L1d/L1i, 2M L2, ? L3
Std. Flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat
pse36 cflsh mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss sse3 pclmulqdq ssse3 cx16 pcid
sse4_1 sse4_2 x2apic popcnt tsc_deadline aes xsave osxsave avx
hypervisor
Ext. Flags: tsc_adjust syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm lahf_lm


Well, a Xeon E-26xx, no need to say much about that. Nice processor, even the older generations. 2 MB L2 cache is nice and all the usual flags are passed through.

Processor & memory:

Single core: 223,68 195,36 228,94 12,66 2,35 15,01
Multi core: 254,54 211,96 266,45 16,73 4,68 21,41


First, as side note. Remember what I said above about the L5630? That old Westmere achieves about 85% of the E-2670 performance! Just mentioning it because many people seem to think that there is no life before E-26xx v3 - that's obviously wrong, especially when you care for bang for the buck.
Not much else to say other than the span suggests that that node is tightly packed. Not yet on the bad side but certainly tighly packed.

Disk:

Seq.Wr.: 204,95 74,54 265,76 63,63 29,67 93,3
Rnd.Wr: 14,69 13,41 15,66 8,72 6,59 15,31
Seq.Rd: 395,48 250,53 499,95 36,65 26,41 63,07
Rnd.Rd: 666,1 290,29 801,87 56,42 20,38 76,8


Meh, not so nice. Looks like a SAS or SATA spindles array. If it's SSD then it's a really poor one. That's not to say it's plain sh_tty, but it's certainly pulling down the verdict; That machine has the potential for more and the disks are spoiling it.

Network - Same as above.

Summary: Not recommended. Not as in "that's sh_tty", it's not, but as in "you'll get much better elsewhere for the money". As for the dedi, the system isn't bad, not at all, but it's simply way too expensive.

Important side note: I don't know how good or bad their support is because my interaction was quite limited; they reacted quickly however. THAT could be the factor to survive next to HostSolutions whose support is ridiculously poor. Probably they should rethink their pricing, too, or at least have more promos plus they should show a much more constructive attitude here at LET. And I'd suggest that dedicate_server seriously thinks about that advice because IF (a very big if) HostSolutions did improve their support drastically, I wouldn't see much of a future for dedicat_server, certainly not in the low and mid range segment.

(P.S. As usual, please forgive my sh_tty formatting)

Top News