All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Alternative source to Nocix Dual Xeon E5 Custom Dual E5-2670v2 64GB
Nocix are currently doing
Dual Xeon E5 Custom
Dual E5-2670v2
20 cores / 40 Threads 64GB ECC 4TB SATA
For $84
I'm very happy with them so far, and have 3 machines with them, 2 of them with that spec (2 directly, and another via a reseller). For my application , I don't need 100% uptime, as the machines are doing work provided in a work queue, and as long as all machines don't go down at once, we have enough machines spread over other locations to handle short term outages as the work queue can grow somewhat without massively impacting customers. The Nocix machines are a small part of our cluster, but we'd like to get more machines at a similar price, but are hesitant to have too many machines located in the same data centre, and I wondered if anyone is aware of similarly price competitive alternatives outside of the Nocix data centre (the closer to Europe the better).
We don't need SSD (in fact we need almost no hard drive space at all), but ideally we do need around 1GB per hyperthread although we could probably deal with anything over 512KB/thread. So the two main criteria would be:
- As many hyperthreadable CPU cores as possible per $ (ideally with at least 2.5Ghz non-turbo speed per core, although anything with a single core passmark benchmark above 1230 would be ok).
- At least 512KB/hyperthread, ideally 1GB/Thread. So from 1GB to 2GB per physical core.
- Minimal storage space (entire usage well below 5GB including operating system space)
Comments
Tagging @randvegeta
@teamacc, thanks for the tagging, though I'm not sure how helpful I can be here since I'm mainly offering HK based servers.
Closest I have in stock now are some single socket E5-2650 and a Dual E5-2670 (v1).. but $84 is pretty damn cheap for this kind of server.
What exactly are you planning to do with these servers?
Thanks randvegeta,
I'm running chess position analysis on the servers. Our customers don't have direct network contact with the machines, they interact with a central server from where we farm out the work to our server nodes before sending it back to the central server to be fed back to the customers. The location isn't massively important, but our central server is in Europe so the lower the latency to that location the better for us. From what I can see, it is hard to find something as cheap as $84 in other locations, but figured if anyone would know, it would be the folks on here.
Here's some very similar deals that I quickly found on WHT:
Reliable Hosting Services
HostRush
PerfectIP
No idea how good/reliable these hosts are so definitely look up reviews and such before committing.
As @randvegeta already said, it's pretty damn cheap.
Some options that come off the top of my head are:
wholesaleinternet they come pretty close at some deals
or
worldstream located in the netherlands
Edit: nvm wholesaleinternet if you are looking for a different location
I believe nocix wsi and dedispec are all the same company?
Yes just edited my comment. Forgot that he was looking for different location
Needaserver.net has some Dual E5-2660 v2/32GB/128GB SSD servers on 100mbit for $79.99 a month. Located in Las Vegas and LA. They seem to have some history here on LET, but I was with them for a couple of months with no issues (at least at their LA location).
Bookmarked for further reading.
Further to my comment dedispec do have 3 locations not sure if the partner companies have the same? I was looking at dedispec as need a 64gb+ ram server.
How much bandwidth do you need? I might be able to offer something in Lithuania. If you essentially don't need much bandwidth, just 1 IP, and accept basically no SLA, then it would be possible.
A lot of the cost of hosting is networking and man-power. Low bandwidth = low networking demands, and no SLA means no liabilty (so low risk) and if you don't need support and can wait for working hours to resolve any potential problems, then it's all possible. Essentially you then just rent hardware and power and the network connection and 'support' would just be provided on a courtesy basis.
If that's what you're looking for, it's possible. Otherwise... tall order on a small budget.
$84/mo it is very cheap price, will be very difficult to find exactly this configuration.
Thanks MasonR,
I'd seen Hostrush's offering a week or two ago, but they were $99 then, that $88 special they are offering at the moment looks like the closest I've seen to the Nocix pricing.
Reliable hosting's $100 deals on faster CPUs is probably competitive from a total cpu power per $ cost given the clock speed on the 2690s, but for my application more cores is better for me than higher single core performance (although that is nice to have too).
I hadn't noticed the PerfectIP offer before, their Dual Xeon E5-2650 at $69 is quite close
in price/core compared to the Nocix deal, although a bit slower and a bit further away from my central server than some of the other options, but definitely worth further consideration.
Yes, that is what I'm looking for.
I've never needed more support than a reboot or very rarely the replacement of a faulty hard drive. I don't care that much about a SLA, because I don't require 100% uptime, as unless a large number of my nodes go down at the same time, customers don't notice downtime from their point view (slightly slower wait times for some services when the work queue grows, but we try to over provision such that we'd need to be unlucky with a demand spike and downtime to co-incidence for them to even notice wait time increases).
Bandwidth usage is super low compared to the average hosted server I would guess. A 40 hyperthread machine uses a bit over 300MB a day (total in/out) according to Nocix's dashboard. Bandwidth usage should be varying in direct proportion to the number of hyperthreads. That isn't full utilisation, but does look like a consistent average, and I doubt it would grow much over 1GB, even if we were fully utilised. We only need 1 IP per machine (and don't need reverse dns). A reliable network is probably reasonably important however. Intermittent packet loss is annoying for our application, so providers that experience congestion and the resulting packet loss can cause some problems for us that the customer notices. We can deal with a complete outage from time to time much more easily than we can with constant low level packet loss.
Lithuania also suits us due to the location of our central servers (Germany), I'd given up hoping to find something in Europe because everything I'd seen so far even remotely close to Nocix in pricing was all US based.
Ill also tag @cociu, since he's been doing some custom stuff from time to time
That is also quite a good deal. I noticed them a few days ago, and I admit I was a little put off by their 3.00GHz / 20 Cores spec. Quoting their turbo speeds without mentioning the default clock rate seems like a somewhat questionable practice that I don't see other providers doing (seems if Turbo clock is mentioned it is at least alongside the base clock). It made me wonder what else they were hiding in the spec, but I guess at the price point I'm looking at , these type of things are to be expected.
Hetzner now have AMD Epyc 24 core machines starting at 170 euro/mo, maybe too steep for you, dunno.
I love hetzner and have several machines with them with multi-year uptimes, but yeah, for my application their AMD machines are a bit too pricey compared to alternatives, might be interesting to watch what price they go for in their server auctions in a year or two though.
You seem to be looking for cheaper servers e.g nocix, which is single-homed and shouldnt be used for anything critical in terms of reliability. I would advise you to stick with Nocix since their offers are really good and their support is pretty good as well.
While reliability of single hosts isn't that important in my setup, having a large percentage of them become unavailable at the same time is a big problem. I'll be happy to have more Nocix hosts at their current price point at some stage, but more than I have now would be starting to put too many eggs in the one basket, which is why I was looking for an alternative. I've been fairly happy with Nocix so far, although it has only been a few months, and only a week or two with the e5-2670v2s.
I'd need to expand into at least one other data centre before I felt comfortable with more servers at Nocix. Of course I'm fairly price sensitive too, so at the end of the day I might need to accept a moderate risk increase to get the price point I'm after, but it does look like there are a few offers out there that I hadn't seen before that others have suggested in this thread that are close enough in price to Nocix to be worth considering, so I'll likely give one of those a go first, and then return for more with Nocix when we next need a capacity increase.
I see your point. Wouldn't 2x E5-2620 suffice? Even though the E5 2670v2s do have great processing power, I mean, it's much bettr than the E5-2620, no comparison. But, with such limited budget, it's not easy.
Why do you need such big machines? A 2x-E5-2670 even a v2 is at best 3x faster than a current E3 or i7 that you can get at the Hetzner auction or Worldstream for $30 or so ex VAT.
Can I ask what the application area is? Just wondering.
Sorry for the delay replying to these responses.
The E4-2620 v1 is ok, it is probably the minimum single threaded performance I'd like to go down to though, as my slowest cluster node on a single threaded basis are dual X5650. It would need to be a fair bit cheaper than the E5-2670v2 because of the 6 cores versus 10 cores. 40 hyperthreads versus 24 is also a bit more convenient for some parts of my application.
Yes, I'm providing chess engine analysis as a service, and I run a single engine instance per hyperthread. While some of the hetzner rentals come close in price per total cpu power, none of the Hetzner machines I've seen can compete on price per hyperthread. The AMD CPU options they are offering now may be competitive when they are no longer the shiny new thing, and available for rental at the Hetzner auction, but right now the AMDs are their only really high-core options (apart from the Dell machines which are fairly expensive, even at auction).
Hetzner's fastet 4 core machines at auction right now appears to be i7-4770s. If you multiply the number of cores by the single thread passmark , then a dual e5-2670v2 is 3.576 times as much processing power. If you can pickup that machine at Hetzner auction for $30 you'd still need 3.57630 = $107.28 to have the same processing power as the $84 Nocix machines. So even without considering per core pricing, the single thread price comparison is still high.
Then, when you consider the cores, you'd have 3.5764 cores = 14 cores versus 20 cores, and for my application, while extra per core performance is nice, more cores is nicer, and to get the equivalent cores it is about $150 hetzner vs $84 nocix.
I guess the problem is that I've picked what is pretty much the best price for core option you can get at the moment, and asked for an equivalent in a different data centre, and right now that seems to be very hard to do (although there have been some suggestions made earlier of options that come close enough to be worth paying a little extra or getting a little less power to not have too many machines in one spot).
If by close to Europe you would be fine with actually Europe I think @joeri offers those Dual E5-2670s in the Netherlands.
@pt909 why don't you grab a few 2x E5645 from joesdatacenter.com , they seem to be right around your price point.
I'm trying to avoid going lower than the X5650 for single core performance, which puts the E5645 out of contention, but joesdatacenter does have some reasonably priced X5650 servers though, which I have on my short list, but with the memory I need I think I can probably get slightly cheaper elsewhere at the moment (but not by much).
Thank you for explaining to me, feel free to PM me, I might be able to arrange something for you within your budget.
@pt909 - As previously mentioned I'll keep you posted on pricing once we roll out similar E5 configurations in West Virginia in a week or two, plan is to be similar to the KC pricing. And the KC configuration pricing was dropped slightly as noted below.
Dual E5-2660v1: 64GB / 4TB HDD or 480GB SSD - $59
Dual E5-2670v2: 64GB / 4TB HDD or 480GB SSD - $79
Thanks, interesting, I hadn't realized the 2670v2 cpu power was that favorable. Though, according to
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php
a dual 2670v2 has 21687 passmark, which is only around 2x an i7-4770. That doesn't sound right since a single 2670v2 is listed as 15060 passmark, so maybe the dual number involves a lot of memory contention. I think even in the best case though, the 2670v2 advantage is a bit marginal.
I've always wanted one of those Nocix 2670*'s though, so that just makes me want it a little more ;-).
I sometimes wonder if you could speed up chess engines by pushing the static evaluation function to a GPU so you can do 1000s of board positions at once. But that's drifting from the topic.
Can I ask what kind of customer wants to buy that kind of service? No I'm not thinking of offering it: it just surprises me that any are out there.
I don't know about the specifics of the passmark benchmark, but it can be hard to find applications that make good use of 20 cores/40 hyperthreads. I think that is partly why you don't see a huge passmark score for a dual 2670v2 compared to a single. For my application though where I'm running a seperate application on each thread instead of trying to scale up one application across 40 threads, the 2670v2 is a great platform, as I can basically count 20xsingle threaded performance and scale almost directly in step with the number of cores (I guess you'll still get some memory contention, but compared to the co-ordination costs of splitting up some kinds of workloads across a bunch of threads , and joining back the results, it isn't that much of an issue - obviously that depends on the application though, some application are trivial to split and you get closer to perfect scaling).
I would guess for a lot of applications, you are right, the difference would be marginal, because lots of applications can't make full use of all cores without losing a bit of performance on each extra core, but if you're doing what I'm doing, I'm probably getting close to the 3.57 times benefit seen from a single core benchmark comparison.