Howdy, Stranger!

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


Russian providers, part 2 with 3 VPS/providers - Page 3
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.

Russian providers, part 2 with 3 VPS/providers

13»

Comments

  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker
    edited January 2022

    Ok, back to data and reviews ...
    here is one more that has been proposed, a cheap Selectel VPS. As seems usual with russian VPS providers this one was a mixed experience too. The first big grain of salt was right at the beginning. Selectel's registration process is confusing and cumbersome. Like many russian providers they ask for a phone number but unlike most I know of they also use it for verification and demand to fill in the last digits of their phone number calling you - but with a twist: it doesn't work with (at least west- and central-) european numbers, so you are stuck. Happily though there is a support button on the page which allow you to open a ticket which I did; sometime later I got a response and they had activated my account manually. So, no show-stopper but quite cumbersome and time wasting, but OK, you have to go through that only once.
    After that I could finally order the rather cheap VPS but to do so I had to go through another somewhat cumbersome and confusing process that, in the middle of the ordering process, forced me to go to a different page in order to transfer funds to my Selectel account before I could continue and finalize ordering. The good news is that I needed to only transfer RUB 200 (~ €2.25).

    The next (rather large) grain of salt was their OS selection. While they do offer the major linux distros (and up to date it seems) they only offer those. No ISO support. I asked their support and got a dry "We do not support ISOs" (with VPS I guess). Nor Windows btw.

    Selectel uses yet another panel, but it works well and actually is one of the nicest and most useful I've seen so far. For example you really get to see all relevant data on their server overview page, number of vCores, memory size, size and type of drive (SSD), your IP and network mask + gateway IP and even the reverse DNS, and an optional SSH (public) key. Really nice and useful, well done Selectel!

    Now, let's look at the performance, first processor and memory, based on over 100 runs:

    Version 2.5.0, (c) 2018+ jsg (->lowendtalk.com)
    Machine: amd64, Arch.: x86_64, Model: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 v4 @ 2.40GHz
    OS, version: Linux 4.19.0, Mem.: 482 MB
    CPU - Cores: 1, Family/Model/Stepping: 6/79/1
    Cache: 32K/32K L1d/L1i, 2M L2, 16M 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 vmx ssse3 fma cx16
              pcid sse4_1 sse4_2 x2apic movbe popcnt tsc_deadline aes xsave osxsave
              avx f16c rdrnd hypervisor
    Ext. Flags: fsgsbase tsc_adjust bmi1 hle avx2 smep bmi2 erms invpcid rtm rdseed
              adx smap syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm lahf_lm lzcnt
    
    AES? Yes
    Nested Virt.? Yes
    HW RNG? Yes
    
    ProcMem SC [MB/s]: avg 148.6 - min 23.9 (16.1 %),  Amax 265.2 (178.5 %)
    ProcMem MA [MB/s]: avg 255.4 - min 134.7 (52.7 %), max 262.3 (102.7 %)
    ProcMem MB [MB/s]: avg 255.2 - min 119.7 (46.9 %), max 262.4 (102.8 %)
    ProcMem AES [MB/s]: avg 495.7 - min 276.0 (55.7 %), max 508.9 (102.7 %)
    ProcMem RSA [kp/s]: avg 40.2 - min 23.9 (59.5 %), max 47.5 (118.3 %)
    

    That's a bit worse than VPSina and reg.ru, about on par with VpsVille and better than the other ones. Oh and they clearly tell you the procesor model rather than playing "Qemu virtual processor" games, nice. Also you get hardware support for AES and random as well as nested virtualization.
    What I definitely don't like is the extreme single core spread.

    On to the drive:

         
         --- Disk 4 KB - Buffered ---
         Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 1.74 - min 0.65 (37.3%), max 3.49 (200.5%)
         Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 2.99 - min 0.82 (27.4%), max 6.78 (226.7%)
         Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 217.39 - min 81.36 (37.4%), max 416.03 (191.4%)
         Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 1993.06 - min 486.05 (24.4%), max 2229.11 (111.8%)
         --- Disk 4 KB - Sync/Direct ---
         Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 1.58 - min 0.55 (34.7%), max 3.05 (192.7%)
         Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 2.48 - min 0.66 (26.6%), max 5.47 (220.2%)
         Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 220.77 - min 75.77 (34.3%), max 398.31 (180.4%)
         Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 1984.83 - min 679.17 (34.2%), max 2234.48 (112.6%)
         
         --- Disk 64 KB - Buffered ---
         Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 22.47 - min 8.38 (37.3%), max 38.94 (173.3%)
         Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 34.27 - min 9.34 (27.3%), max 66.55 (194.2%)
         Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 229.56 - min 83.54 (36.4%), max 324.63 (141.4%)
         Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 1688.05 - min 284.65 (16.9%), max 2684.57 (159.0%)
         --- Disk 64 KB - Sync/Direct ---
         Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 21.68 - min 8.75 (40.4%), max 39.01 (179.9%)
         Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 30.56 - min 9.55 (31.3%), max 58.50 (191.4%)
         Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 235.19 - min 109.20 (46.4%), max 325.05 (138.2%)
         Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 1704.78 - min 685.72 (40.2%), max 2521.83 (147.9%)
         
         --- Disk 1 MB - Buffered ---
         Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 131.05 - min 55.05 (42.0%), max 188.75 (144.0%)
         Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 157.97 - min 61.03 (38.6%), max 235.66 (149.2%)
         Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 310.80 - min 202.28 (65.1%), max 322.60 (103.8%)
         Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 3644.12 - min 1132.17 (31.1%), max 4855.88 (133.3%)
         --- Disk 1 MB - Sync/Direct ---
         Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 142.25 - min 61.83 (43.5%), max 218.50 (153.6%)
         Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 144.42 - min 65.53 (45.4%), max 231.44 (160.2%)
         Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 305.84 - min 177.34 (58.0%), max 322.55 (105.5%)
         Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 3534.26 - min 1849.94 (52.3%), max 4844.18 (137.1%)
         --- Disk IOps (Sync/Direct) ---
         Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 3.59 - min 1.18 (32.9%), max 8.10 (225.9%)
         IOps             : avg 918.07 - min 300.80 (32.8%), max 2072.47 (225.7%)
         
    

    Hmm, that's worse than all others except for the super-cheap gcorelabs thingy.
    The benchmark runs did however complete quite quickly, so the only remaining block, the network, should be quite good.

    Let's have a look:

    --- Network ---
    US LAX lax.download.datapacket.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 73.1 - min 66.7 (91.2%), max 75.5 (103.3%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 166.1 - min 163.7 (98.5%), max 168.8 (101.6%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 168.7 - min 163.8 (97.1%), max 179.2 (106.2%)
    
    NO OSL speedtest.osl01.softlayer.com [F: 100]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 0.0 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 0.0 (0.0%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 0.0 - min 0.0 (-nan%), max 0.0 (-nan%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 0.0 - min 0.0 (-nan%), max 0.0 (-nan%)
    
    US SJC speedtest.sjc01.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 57.7 - min 49.1 (85.0%), max 62.6 (108.4%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 191.5 - min 188.3 (98.3%), max 193.1 (100.8%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 217.5 - min 189.8 (87.3%), max 973.2 (447.4%)
    
    AU MEL speedtest.c1.mel1.dediserve.com [F: 55]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 15.3 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 38.0 (247.6%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 336.2 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 388.3 (115.5%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 337.8 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 388.3 (115.0%)
    
    JP TOK speedtest.tokyo2.linode.com [F: 2]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 54.9 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 64.2 (116.8%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 193.0 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 198.2 (102.7%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 201.6 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 221.4 (109.8%)
    
    IT MIL speedtest.mil01.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 174.5 - min 147.8 (84.7%), max 213.1 (122.1%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 51.7 - min 50.5 (97.7%), max 60.4 (116.8%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 57.0 - min 50.5 (88.6%), max 509.1 (893.2%)
    
    TR UNK 185.65.204.169 [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 84.8 - min 77.0 (90.8%), max 85.6 (100.9%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 68.4 - min 68.1 (99.6%), max 69.8 (102.0%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 69.4 - min 68.3 (98.5%), max 70.9 (102.2%)
    
    FR PAR speedtest.par01.softlayer.com [F: 10]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 192.1 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 240.5 (125.2%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 48.8 - min 48.4 (99.1%), max 51.5 (105.4%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 67.3 - min 48.6 (72.2%), max 1344.7 (1997.1%)
    
    SG SGP mirror.sg.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 60.0 - min 56.5 (94.1%), max 63.4 (105.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 197.9 - min 197.8 (99.9%), max 200.0 (101.0%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 201.0 - min 197.8 (98.4%), max 213.1 (106.0%)
    
    BR SAO speedtest.sao01.softlayer.com [F: 10]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 31.0 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 44.2 (142.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 238.5 - min 238.3 (99.9%), max 240.2 (100.7%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 250.6 - min 238.3 (95.1%), max 1340.8 (535.0%)
    
    IN CHN speedtest.che01.softlayer.com [F: 108]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 0.0 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 0.0 (0.0%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 303.8 - min 236.6 (77.9%), max 320.3 (105.4%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 303.8 - min 236.6 (77.9%), max 320.3 (105.4%)
    
    GR UNK speedtest.ftp.otenet.gr [F: 39]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 86.0 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 143.0 (166.2%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 49.3 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 83.3 (168.9%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 49.9 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 86.6 (173.4%)
    
    US WDC mirror.wdc1.us.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 102.6 - min 95.1 (92.6%), max 108.9 (106.1%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 110.5 - min 110.3 (99.8%), max 112.2 (101.6%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 111.3 - min 110.3 (99.1%), max 119.6 (107.5%)
    
    RU MOS speedtest.hostkey.ru [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 2448.5 - min 847.5 (34.6%), max 4912.1 (200.6%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 1.2 - min 1.0 (83.3%), max 2.9 (241.7%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 1.6 - min 1.1 (69.6%), max 8.0 (505.9%)
    
    US DAL speedtest.dal05.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 66.8 - min 55.4 (82.9%), max 72.6 (108.6%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 166.1 - min 165.6 (99.7%), max 174.1 (104.8%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 168.0 - min 165.6 (98.6%), max 381.1 (226.8%)
    
    UK LON speedtest.lon02.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 222.5 - min 194.1 (87.2%), max 258.6 (116.2%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 47.5 - min 46.7 (98.3%), max 51.6 (108.6%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 96.3 - min 46.8 (48.6%), max 1322.4 (1372.8%)
    
    US NYC nyc.download.datapacket.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 113.8 - min 101.2 (88.9%), max 116.6 (102.5%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 106.8 - min 105.6 (98.9%), max 175.7 (164.5%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 108.1 - min 105.7 (97.8%), max 175.7 (162.6%)
    
    RO BUC 185.183.99.8 [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 185.5 - min 159.7 (86.1%), max 204.5 (110.2%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 68.3 - min 65.3 (95.6%), max 73.5 (107.6%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 71.9 - min 65.3 (90.9%), max 217.1 (302.1%)
    
    NL AMS mirror.nl.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 260.4 - min 46.6 (17.9%), max 306.2 (117.6%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 41.4 - min 41.2 (99.6%), max 42.9 (103.7%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 41.6 - min 41.2 (99.0%), max 43.4 (104.3%)
    
    CN HK mirror.hk.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 52.3 - min 48.4 (92.4%), max 57.1 (109.1%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 216.8 - min 216.5 (99.9%), max 219.7 (101.3%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 231.9 - min 216.5 (93.3%), max 245.2 (105.7%)
    
    DE FRA fra.lg.core-backbone.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 225.6 - min 170.2 (75.4%), max 267.1 (118.4%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 44.7 - min 44.4 (99.3%), max 47.2 (105.6%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 48.4 - min 44.6 (92.1%), max 63.4 (130.9%)
    

    And yes, indeed their connectivity is very good for a russian provider. Not important per se for most of us but a good indicator of the node bandwith: Moscow is almost 2.5 Gb/s avg and max of almost 5 Gb/s, so this node highly likely has dual 10 Gb/s ports, very nice!
    And the rest is quite nice, too, with the major european targets being about or above 200 Mb/s, the East coast a bit above 100 Mb/s, the West coast and Asia in the 60 - 70 Mb/s range and even HongKong with a bit over 50 Mb/s.

    Finally, here's the updated overview table:

    [VPS/provider]      AES   Nest. RNG    mem [MB], disk [GB] ca. €/mo
    gcorelabs           Y     N     Y      512       7         1.0   
    reg.ru              Y     Y     Y      1024      25        3.45
    sale-dedic          Y     N     Y      1024      10        3.20
    VDSina2             Y     N     Y      1024      30        3.80 
    VPSville            Y     N     N      1024      15        3.00
    Selectel            Y     Y     Y      512       20        2.25
    
               procMem  SC     (Spread)     MA      MB     AES    RSA  
    gcorelabs           110.2  36.7/193.4   184.0   187.0  420.1  44.7 
    reg.ru              161.7  40.0/153.5   240.7   240.8  954.3  82.8 
    sale-dedic          114.8  28.2/180.4   173.9   168.7  422.4  38.3 
    VDSina2             179.8  38.5/175.0   284.5   287.0  1099.4 80.9 
    VPSville            144.3  29.3/174.1   238.9   238.7  554.0  50.0 
    Selectel            148.6  16.1/178.5   255.4   255.2  495.7  40.2
    
               disk     1 MB RSb  (Spread)     4K/4T WSs (Spread)     IOPS   
    gcorelabs           262.66    99.4/100.3   2.72      100.0/100.0  696.29 
    reg.ru              722.76    91.4/106.3   5.40      71.5/114.1   1382.09
    sale-dedic          621.46    83.3/118.3   6.46      88.3/108.6   1652.59
    VDSina2             1151.88   53.1/110.1  22.66      66.5/116.1   5799.94
    VPSville            579.17    88.2/106.1   6.59      81.1/105.1   1688.07
    Selectel            310.80    65.1/103.8   3.59      32.9/225.9   918.07
    
               network  RU,MOS   US,LAX  US, NYC  DE,FRA  UK,LON   SG,SGP  CN,HKG
    gcorelabs           266.9    30.7    44.9     90.2    76.1     30.3    29.5     
    reg.ru              959.3    61.3    95.0     251.7   228.6    54.4    43.2
    sale-dedic         1184.2    34.5    51.7     135.5   117.3    30.4    27.1
    VDSina2             441.7    65.7    94.4     325.0   233.3    60.0    41.4
    VPSville           1660.9    23.9    36.4     105.0   99.2     27.3    20.9
    Selectel           2448.5    73.1    113.8    225.6   222.5    60.0    52.3
    

    Summary: This (model) is not a competitor on the higher end but rather one to the supercheap gcorelabs, ihor hosting, firstbyte, etc. VPS and besides the slower disk it can even compete with e.g. sale-dedic and VpsVille both of which are more expensive.
    For me no ISO support is a showstopper and that's why I won't keep the VPs although I really enjoyed it. But if you are a "debian and be done" or "CentOs and be done" person, this is a very attractive option, and btw. they seem to offer a WordPress template too (although for that I'd strongly suggest a larger VPS).
    On the other hand Selectel is more expensive than all the other providers in this thread as soon as you want a VPS with 1 GB memory or more or even 2 vCores.

    As reg.ru is mercilessly email spamming me since I unblocked them I won't keep my (quite nice) VPS; one can block only the spam and get only the VPS related emails but for me it's a question of principle, I simply refuse to buy from spammers.

    So, VPSina is the winner, at least for the moment, though I don't hold my breath for something as good or better but cheaper coming up mainly for two reasons: (a) it seems unlikely, and (b) VDSina IMO has fewer and less disturbing quirks than the other providers (in this roundup). But again, this Selectel thingy is a nice and decent cheap option if (a) you are willing to accept a cumbersome registration process, (b) value connectivity above other factors, and (c) don't mind a slowish SSD.

    Thanked by 2fluffernutter raynor
  • ValdikSSValdikSS Member
    edited January 2022

    @jsg said: Btw. do you have a link to the evil Roskomnadzor list?

    https://reestr.rublacklist.net/
    https://ntc.party/t/popular-websites-and-services-which-are-blocked-in-russia/135
    Also many email services are blocked: https://ntc.party/t/email/400

    You can, however, circumvent them in most cases, without using any tunneling/proxy/VPN. Check GoodbyeDPI and zapret.

    Thanked by 1bulbasaur
  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker
    edited March 2022

    Just a quick update I put here because unfortunately the "The Russian server seems to be difficult to pay" thread is closed.

    Unfortunately I had to experience a sh_t-ton of basically spam both from Selectel and (to a somewhat lesser degree) from VpsVille so they ended up on my "avoid, do not buy from them" list.

    Instead I got myself a second (and newer) and SSD based 'ferrum' VPS with 1 vCore, 1 GB memory, 20 GB SSD, and unlimited traffic @ 200 Mb/s. Btw, both an additional vCore and additional RAM are dirt cheap at about €1 especially at the current exchange rate but I didn't need more.

    ihor support was great and quite quick (less than 15 minutes). I needed them because somehow their "install from your own ISO" didn't work properly (or I failed to understand how it works). Uploading the ISO worked like a charm (modulo progress info) but the BIOS didn't offer me a "start from ISO" option. ihor's support made that work fine for me. Nice!

    My first impression wrt node and disk is positive but I won't say more until I've completed 50 or so benchmark runs.

    Payment via Paypal worked without any problems.

  • @jsg Perhaps you noticed Clo, the FirstVDS.ru cloud service. According to my experience, it's pretty stable and prices are quite average.

    Selectel is too noisy, and amongst the most expensive providers I saw.

    Thanked by 1jsg
  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker

    @Master_Bo said:
    @jsg Perhaps you noticed Clo, the FirstVDS.ru cloud service. According to my experience, it's pretty stable and prices are quite average.

    Thank you but for me personally ihor is my preferred low end russian provider. Based on first early results the new node is faster than the old one too and the SSD seems to be quite nice too and so is connectivity.

    I would even have tested FirstVDS.ru but if I'm not mistaken they just recently had their (some? all?) customer data leaked/hacked. Please correct me if I'm wrong. So, my appetite to test/benchmark them is quite modest at least for the time being.

    Selectel is too noisy, and amongst the most expensive providers I saw.

    Well formulated, quite diplomatically. For me, frankly, I meanwhile book them under "spammers", just like reg.ru.

    I'll come back with results of the ihor 'ferrum' VPS once I have enough results (but it looks promising so far).

  • Just to say that I once had network issues on ihor, like a bit of packet loss (visible on most tests, from multiple locations).

    I put a ticket in and after 45min it was fixed.
    Always had quick responses from them so far (not a customer anymore, but they have added Finland as location, my experience is for their Russian DC).

    Thanked by 1jsg
  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker

    @magicvpn said:
    Just to say that I once had network issues on ihor, like a bit of packet loss (visible on most tests, from multiple locations).

    I put a ticket in and after 45min it was fixed.
    Always had quick responses from them so far (not a customer anymore, but they have added Finland as location, my experience is for their Russian DC).

    Yes, their support is astonishingly quick for such a cheap provider and professional.In English too btw.

    My VPSs are in the Moscow DC too. I have no data or experience wrt other ihor DCs.

  • @jsg said:
    @Neoon

    Re "gcore": got that tip already a few times. Unfortunately though they seem to be a Luxembourg company (and not russian), plus they aren't particularly cheap.

    They are Russian at their core 😉

  • @jsg said:
    dirt cheap at about €1 especially at the current exchange rate but I didn't need more.

    If they have a credit deposit system, I'd load at least the amounts to cover a year of service and take advantage of the exchange.

  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker
    edited March 2022

    So, here's a mini review of ihor based on my new 'ferrum' server with SSD (the old one has HDD).

    Processor and memory, and particularly crypto performance, aren't great at all. No significant changes compared to old (already reviewed) VPS. Connectivity however is quite nice for a russian VPS. I've inserted it into the table:

               network  RU,MOS   US,LAX  US, NYC  DE,FRA  UK,LON   SG,SGP  CN,HKG
    gcorelabs           266.9    30.7    44.9     90.2    76.1     30.3    29.5     
    reg.ru              959.3    61.3    95.0     251.7   228.6    54.4    43.2
    sale-dedic         1184.2    34.5    51.7     135.5   117.3    30.4    27.1
    VDSina2             441.7    65.7    94.4     325.0   233.3    60.0    41.4
    VPSville           1660.9    23.9    36.4     105.0   99.2     27.3    20.9
    Selectel           2448.5    73.1    113.8    225.6   222.5    60.0    52.3
    ihor ferrum        182.0     0.9      84.7    170.8    8.7      35.7    47.7
     
    

    (Note: LAX had about 86% failure rate. San Jose nearby achieved 51.2 though, so it might be a target issue. And London is misleading (ca 60% failure rate, same target provider as LAX) because Paris is ca. 170, Milano still ca 140, Oslo ca. 175, etc. so actually connectivity to Europe is quite good and better than sale-dedic, gcorelabs, and VpsVille)

    I'm quite happy with the connectivity modulo the VPS being limited to 200 Mb/s but also costs only ca. € 2.50/mo which is comparable to Selectel, which has better processor and mem as well as better connectivity but a much worse disk. The reason I prefer the ihor VPS though is that ISOs are no problem with ihor, one doesn't get spammed, and also needs not jump through hoops to register. To put it plainly, I don't care about 1 or even more Gb/s to Moscow and major russian cities only, what I care about is general connectivity and there most russian "1 Gb/s" (or even more) providers aren't much better than ihor. So, all factors considered, for me ihor is the preferred really cheap russian provider. Feel free to look above at other providers I tested if "cheap" isn't your priority.

    Here's the data for those interested, based on a bit over 75 runs:

    US SJC speedtest.sjc01.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 51.2 - min 47.9 (93.5%), max 53.4 (104.2%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 190.8 - min 189.9 (99.5%), max 191.2 (100.2%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 196.3 - min 189.9 (96.7%), max 550.5 (280.4%)
    
    FR PAR ipv4.paris.testdebit.info [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 170.5 - min 149.5 (87.7%), max 173.1 (101.5%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 46.7 - min 46.4 (99.4%), max 49.6 (106.2%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 46.8 - min 46.4 (99.2%), max 50.6 (108.1%)
    
    AU MEL speedtest.c1.mel1.dediserve.com [F: 3]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 27.2 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 30.2 (111.1%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 332.7 - min 329.7 (99.1%), max 340.3 (102.3%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 335.4 - min 329.8 (98.3%), max 348.4 (103.9%)
    
    JP TOK speedtest.tokyo2.linode.com [F: 25]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 30.6 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 59.6 (194.9%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 186.5 - min 173.3 (92.9%), max 205.1 (110.0%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 186.7 - min 173.3 (92.8%), max 205.1 (109.9%)
    
    IT MIL speedtest.mil01.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 140.8 - min 112.4 (79.8%), max 148.3 (105.3%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 57.3 - min 55.7 (97.2%), max 60.5 (105.6%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 58.7 - min 55.8 (95.1%), max 61.2 (104.3%)
    
    TR UNK 185.65.204.169 [F: 1]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 80.8 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 83.2 (103.0%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 72.9 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 95.7 (131.3%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 75.4 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 99.9 (132.4%)
    
    US NYC nyc.speedtest.clouvider.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 84.7 - min 58.5 (69.0%), max 109.3 (129.0%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 103.6 - min 103.0 (99.4%), max 105.1 (101.4%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 105.9 - min 103.0 (97.3%), max 118.8 (112.2%)
    
    IN MUM mirrors.piconets.webwerks.in [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 55.7 - min 49.7 (89.4%), max 59.5 (106.8%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 211.1 - min 206.9 (98.0%), max 216.5 (102.5%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 214.3 - min 207.2 (96.7%), max 272.4 (127.1%)
    
    GR UNK speedtest.ftp.otenet.gr [F: 31]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 59.9 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 138.3 (230.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 42.8 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 80.3 (187.5%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 43.1 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 83.3 (193.3%)
    
    SG SGP mirror.sg.leaseweb.net [F: 25]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 35.7 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 60.6 (169.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 122.2 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 189.0 (154.7%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 122.4 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 189.6 (154.9%)
    
    BR SAO speedtest.sao01.softlayer.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 41.2 - min 35.4 (85.9%), max 44.5 (108.0%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 240.7 - min 239.7 (99.6%), max 241.5 (100.4%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 240.8 - min 239.7 (99.6%), max 244.9 (101.7%)
    
    NO OSL mirror.terrahost.no [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 174.5 - min 166.6 (95.5%), max 176.5 (101.2%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 30.6 - min 30.2 (98.8%), max 34.1 (111.6%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 31.4 - min 30.4 (96.7%), max 58.9 (187.3%)
    
    US WDC mirror.wdc1.us.leaseweb.net [F: 17]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 63.7 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 101.6 (159.6%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 105.1 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 120.5 (114.7%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 105.1 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 120.9 (115.0%)
    
    RU MOS speedtest.hostkey.ru [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 182.0 - min 171.9 (94.5%), max 184.5 (101.4%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 1.0 - min 0.9 (85.8%), max 1.3 (123.9%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 1.2 - min 1.0 (81.8%), max 3.4 (278.2%)
    
    US LAX la.speedtest.clouvider.net [F: 72]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 0.9 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 42.4 (4758.7%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 181.7 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 201.2 (110.7%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 181.7 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 201.2 (110.7%)
    
    RO BUC 185.183.99.8 [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 162.2 - min 157.1 (96.9%), max 165.4 (102.0%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 66.0 - min 63.4 (96.1%), max 70.8 (107.3%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 67.3 - min 63.7 (94.7%), max 71.5 (106.3%)
    
    NL AMS mirror.nl.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 160.3 - min 98.2 (61.2%), max 173.7 (108.3%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 38.5 - min 38.2 (99.2%), max 43.6 (113.3%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 38.7 - min 38.3 (98.8%), max 43.6 (112.5%)
    
    CN HK mirror.hk.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 47.7 - min 23.6 (49.4%), max 51.0 (106.9%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 223.6 - min 221.3 (99.0%), max 268.7 (120.2%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 225.2 - min 221.3 (98.3%), max 283.4 (125.8%)
    
    US DAL mirror.dal13.us.leaseweb.net [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 68.1 - min 46.2 (67.9%), max 78.5 (115.3%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 145.3 - min 142.3 (97.9%), max 147.1 (101.2%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 147.4 - min 143.3 (97.2%), max 156.0 (105.8%)
    
    DE FRA fra.lg.core-backbone.com [F: 0]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 170.8 - min 155.1 (90.8%), max 174.6 (102.2%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 38.8 - min 36.3 (93.6%), max 40.9 (105.5%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 40.2 - min 37.0 (92.0%), max 43.3 (107.7%)
    
    UK LON lon.speedtest.clouvider.net [F: 44]
      DL [Mb/s]:      avg 8.7 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 26.9 (307.6%)
      Ping [ms]:      avg 52.0 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 54.8 (105.3%)
      Web ping [ms]:  avg 52.5 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 77.9 (148.3%)
    

    Now, on to the tasty part, the SSD. I'll tell it right away: That VPS comes with a very decent disk. Only 1 of the other VPSs I benchmarked was faster reading 1MB blocks, sequentially, buffered (and sync as well). The same is true for 4k4T write seq., sync! So, this ihor VPS has the 2nd fastest disk of the bunch and it's not even a NVMe. Very nice!

    Here's the data:

     --- Disk 4 KB - Buffered ---
    Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 8.05 - min 7.38 (91.7%), max 8.57 (106.5%)
    Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 7.99 - min 6.66 (83.4%), max 8.57 (107.3%)
    Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 22.01 - min 19.29 (87.6%), max 23.37 (106.2%)
    Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 19.83 - min 16.77 (84.6%), max 21.08 (106.3%)
    --- Disk 4 KB - Sync/Direct ---
    Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 7.56 - min 7.01 (92.7%), max 8.07 (106.7%)
    Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 7.66 - min 7.16 (93.5%), max 8.21 (107.2%)
    Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 21.73 - min 19.23 (88.5%), max 22.99 (105.8%)
    Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 19.70 - min 16.97 (86.1%), max 20.80 (105.6%)
    
    --- Disk 64 KB - Buffered ---
    Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 60.71 - min 50.83 (83.7%), max 64.31 (105.9%)
    Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 80.50 - min 74.89 (93.0%), max 85.10 (105.7%)
    Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 403.10 - min 353.42 (87.7%), max 439.43 (109.0%)
    Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 248.73 - min 202.85 (81.6%), max 264.71 (106.4%)
    --- Disk 64 KB - Sync/Direct ---
    Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 5.52 - min 4.88 (88.5%), max 5.82 (105.5%)
    Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 3.29 - min 2.97 (90.1%), max 3.42 (103.8%)
    Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 407.20 - min 354.59 (87.1%), max 439.12 (107.8%)
    Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 249.58 - min 208.62 (83.6%), max 264.52 (106.0%)
    
    --- Disk 1 MB - Buffered ---
    Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 84.35 - min 76.75 (91.0%), max 90.48 (107.3%)
    Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 202.12 - min 183.85 (91.0%), max 223.59 (110.6%)
    Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 963.42 - min 841.79 (87.4%), max 1040.95 (108.0%)
    Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 892.60 - min 817.52 (91.6%), max 977.54 (109.5%)
    --- Disk 1 MB - Sync/Direct ---
    Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 35.39 - min 32.71 (92.4%), max 38.05 (107.5%)
    Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 41.79 - min 39.16 (93.7%), max 45.91 (109.9%)
    Read seq. [MB/s]:  avg 963.82 - min 835.20 (86.7%), max 1072.34 (111.3%)
    Read rnd. [MB/s]:  avg 891.91 - min 824.93 (92.5%), max 964.97 (108.2%)
    --- Disk IOps (Sync/Direct) ---
    Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 21.06 - min 19.55 (92.8%), max 22.62 (107.4%)
    IOps             : avg 5391.85 - min 5005.37 (92.8%), max 5791.26 (107.4%)
    

    TL;DR: I wouldn't recommend that VPS for major websites, not even because the processor and memory really aren't great but mainly because RSA and AES results are clearly poor. For anything else (as in my use case) where disk and connectivity are the decisive factors, this is a very nice VPS for the rather low price. Add to that the fact that ihor doesn't send spam, offers very decent and friendly support (also in English), generally is easy to deal with and also supports customer uploaded ISOs, so I'm a very happy customer of ihor and like my new VPS a lot. But again, we're talking about a russian provider which to the best of my knowledge sadly invariably translates to stoneage processors at least in the low end segment.

Sign In or Register to comment.