Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Dedicated core VPS (KVM "slice") vs typical VPS.
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Dedicated core VPS (KVM "slice") vs typical VPS.

Hello All,

I would like your opinion on something:

Let's assume that you have a busy web site - a site which you would probably setup on a VPS, taking advantage of a multi-listener NGINX proxy + Apache setup. MySQL is required but your site is "kind" on MySQL usage, since you have already optimized several pages and you serve them as static assets.

In this multi-threaded scenario, from what setup would you theoretically get the most performance:

1) A typical 4-core shared KVM VPS from one of the reputable providers around?
2) A 1-core dedicated KVM slice?

I tend to think that it's better to span such a load on more processors (even virtual ones) than have a big dedicated one. But I may be wrong... Contention could be an issue sometimes. What do you think?

Thanks in advance,
Thanasis.

Comments

  • TarZZ92TarZZ92 Member

    depends if they oversell (selling threads as cores) vs actual cores.

    Thanked by 1tdelenikas
  • VirMachVirMach Member, Patron Provider
    edited May 2017

    4 cores that have fair use policy to 2 cores (50%) is better than 2 dedicated cores, assuming they're both the same type of cores. Because you can always use the 2 cores, and you can sometimes go higher (burst.)

  • You dont get suspended for 100% load

    Thanked by 1tdelenikas
  • MikeAMikeA Member, Patron Provider

    Probably shared cores? I can't speak for every host but for me, most of my servers (full, no space to sell) are almost always under 20-50% CPU utilization... I think this just comes down to personal preference and picking a host that doesn't let CPU abuse go unnoticed.

    Thanked by 1tdelenikas
  • exception0x876exception0x876 Member, Host Rep, LIR

    Assuming the site load is low with occasional bursts, then multiple shared cores are better. If it has constant high load, go for dedicated cores.

    Thanked by 1tdelenikas
  • qtwrkqtwrk Member

    just wanna say one thing , ngixn worker (listener as you referred ?) works on multi-core CPU ? typically one CPU per one worker process ? if I remember it correctly ?

  • Yeap, nginx worker is the official name :) You define as many workers as cores (for optimal performance).

  • tdelenikas said: 1) A typical 4-core shared KVM VPS from one of the reputable providers around? 2) A 1-core dedicated KVM slice?

    In addition to what has been said already:

    Most of the dedicated core VPS on the market (e.g., BuyVM and Ramnode) are E3 whereas the shared KVM from Ramnode are E5.

    Thanked by 1tdelenikas
  • NeoonNeoon Community Contributor, Veteran
    edited May 2017

    When you do run services that depend on CPU Resources like Gameservers, not abusive but it would lag if someone would use all 4 cores on a fair share service.

    Get a KVM with dedicated cores or a Dedi and of course if a provider fails to secure that you can run your applications lag free.

    Thanked by 1tdelenikas
  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran

    You have to check what the cores are. 4 shared cores on an E3 means you're either going to be heavily rate limited or any spike is going to get you suspended. I have a user that came from another host that used E3's + shared cores and he got his service suspended just because the Windows installer is very CPU intensive.

    For shared you want at least an E5 or something similar just so there's a better chance of some spare cycles, but if you have single thread dominated work, get a slice (tm).

    Francisco

  • hostdarehostdare Member, Patron Provider
    edited May 2017

    Shared cores do the job better depending on the overselling rates as not all people will be using all cores at same time . If you need dedicated core,better is dedicated server which is cost just 10+ usd more than what you will pay for a dedicated core vps .

    PS : we sell dedicated core E3 KVM vps but we have not found it more helpful ,so we will move to e5 cpu plans soon

  • williewillie Member

    tdelenikas said: und? 2) A 1-core dedicated KVM slice?

    I tend to think that it's better to span such a load on more processors

    Have you measured your actual cpu load factor over time? My feeling is that the lower end slice plans usually let you burst pretty well just because not that many users really hose cpu, but if you do hose a lot, you'll find that the amount of long dedicated cpu allocated to them is not that much. The larger slice plans get you up to the whole cpu, but they are expensive enough that depending on your requirements, you probably should look at dedicated servers as well.

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider
    edited May 2017

    It is not something that has 1 answer, it is specific to the host and the intended use.

    Some points of the day and for specific use cases the 4 shared cores will destroy the performance of a single core, but with a single core slice you never need to really pay attention, you just use what you need without having to worry about others.

    The reality is that CPU contention is usually the least of any hosts problems, disk IO will be your bottleneck far before that as long as you are using a host that actually pays some attention to abusive customers.

    Even on my most busy nodes CPU rarely averages over 50% (total) for any length of time.

    In my eyes, a slice is essentially the next step between a VPS and a dedi, not necessarily in terms of performance, more in terms of not having to have much consideration for your neighbors.

  • williewillie Member

    AnthonySmith said: disk IO will be your bottleneck far before

    Even on an all-SSD node?

  • hostdarehostdare Member, Patron Provider

    I bet it depends on the abusers in the node ;) ^^

  • @AnthonySmith said:
    The reality is that CPU contention is usually the least of any hosts problems, disk IO will be your bottleneck far before that as long as you are using a host that actually pays some attention to abusive customers.

    What Ant said.

    An E5 unthrottled cpu core on pure SSD, would beat an E3 core coupled to an HDD array for most sites/installations with revenue-generating levels of load.
    (unless you're just reverse proxying to another network)

Sign In or Register to comment.