VPS providers promoting 1Gbps ports are bullshitting their clients

jcarlo9

Did they say "guaranteed 1gbps" ?

cybertech

im surprised purpledaddyhammer hasn't been dropeed yet

afn

@rackabuser said: If you want to learn more, you can get yourself some VPS in the USA and perform a test with yabs. You will see you can reach 1Gbps with other continents.

euh... no I oversimplified things, but upstreams matter. not everywhere in other continents. OVH dedis 10gbps, are not capable of doing 10gbps to another 10 gbps server I have in Europe, because of bottlenecks in where traffic passes. which is why I +1'd jar. Peering matters. If a provider in Europe has direct access to a providers in the USA, then sure, you will get good speed.
Hetzner offers guaranteed 1 gbps on dedis to location with which they have direct access.

From a previous communication on Sat 2021-02-06 01:00 (and we're talking dedids here not VPS):

You also have to note that we can just guarantee the full network speed within our own infrastructure/network.
For some more details, please take a look at this overview.
-----------------%<-----------------
https://www.hetzner.de/unternehmen/rechenzentrum/
-----------------%<-----------------

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards

 Tom Wunderlich

don't turn around and call me a clown because I believed you

If you believe 1 gbps for 3$, then I will. (also buyVM's limit on CPU fair and on network are very well known for everyone around here, just learn these limits and move on) If I tell you throw yourself out of the windows and good things will happen to you in the after life, will you? do not believe everything you hear/read, understand it first.

have you considered for a second that maybe, just maybe, if all VPSes you tried can't do what you expect, then maybe the problem is your expectations and not the VPSes?

You just lack knowledge of how internet and VPS/hosting business works, and there is nothing wrong about it, but when people explain things to you, don't be stubborn, learn it and move on. We all learn new things every day. Advin gave brilliant explanation on the VPS part and why you reasoning can't work... But the internet part is a bit more complex and the summary is, there is no such server on god's earth, be it dedi, or a VPS, or even the mightiest HPC cluster with multiple 10gbps links that I worked on, that will give you 1gbps sustained forever at every single time **and ** (logical and) to every single network point.

One person could do that on the same node? How? I mean, with proper isolation, how could user 1 take bandwidth from user 2? You mean by flooding user 1 on the private network?

I literally gave a simple analogy in my first comment on how this happens.

I understand what you are saying. But even then, it is relatively easy to tell the customers what is guaranteed.

No it's not. Buy a dedi, offer VPS service and let's see you do it if it is that easy...

Shakib

Someone was brusting us at full 1G for like 10 hours recently.

We are doing 100 MB/s stable as it seems.

paijrut

OP should just open his own webhosting business and do like he wanted to do

bruh21

shared is shared. most of the time there is no real “guarantee”. Even if there is a 1G port and 10 customers, I can’t guarantee 100mbps unless I cap everyone.

devp

@SirFoxy said:

@devp said:

@SirFoxy said: The best way to advertise port speed is something along the lines of "up to 1Gbps port speed."

Thats interinsic.

Yes.

In the same way, 1 Gbps would be implied to be shared.

When you rent an apartment, you don't expect to be able to use the whole building.

You have your own tiny slice of that building, and all other resources i.e. electricity, and water are shared within that building.

You don't specifically need to state everything for it to be understood by 9 out of 10 people. It's implied.

Agreed.

Thats how providers were able to provide services at competitive pricing and still occasionally provide more offers.

They have a their ratios calculated upfront.

Francisco

@raindog308 said:
In a different thread, talking about 1gbps port in the EU and referring to the provider's costs:

@Francisco said: Even the cheapest side of transit is 3c-5c, so you're $30 - $50/month at cost for people.

Is cost comparable in the US? 🤷

It's pretty rare that we cap these days. The only caps i've done in the past 3 - 4 months was some new china bandwidth crap going on so we would get 30 - 40 1GB's all trying to push 1Gbit/sec sustained.

Short of abuse it's pretty damn rare, but even then we're trying to 3x - 5x our total capacity in every location we have, just to have that extra room.

Francisco

devp

@Francisco said:

@raindog308 said:
In a different thread, talking about 1gbps port in the EU and referring to the provider's costs:

@Francisco said: Even the cheapest side of transit is 3c-5c, so you're $30 - $50/month at cost for people.

Is cost comparable in the US? 🤷

It's pretty rare that we cap these days. The only caps i've done in the past 3 - 4 months was some new china bandwidth crap going on so we would get 30 - 40 1GB's all trying to push 1Gbit/sec sustained.

Short of abuse it's pretty damn rare, but even then we're trying to 3x - 5x our total capacity in every location we have, just to have that extra room.

Francisco

Multiple providers are allowing high consistent bandwidth these days.

A few years earlier circa 2015 there was a hard limit on bandwidth usage by providers as per their strict agreements.

Francisco

@devp said: Multiple providers are allowing high consistent bandwidth these days.

A few years earlier circa 2015 there was a hard limit on bandwidth usage by providers as per their strict agreements.

Sure, and people do use what they need.

People generally run out of CPU before their port, unless they're doing some proxying (gdrive, etc).

As I said, we're hoping to greatly increase our capacity in all DC's just to have peace of mind and that extra buffer. Just waiting on a few replies on cross connects and if the ports can be provisioned.

Francisco

caracal

@Francisco said: It's pretty rare that we cap these days

Are the caps not automated then?

Francisco

@caracal said: Are the caps not automated then?

Correct, we just keep an eye on our alerts/charts and things like that.

Francisco

servarica_hani

I saw the thread yesterday and due to the results I had to do tests to confirm the findings

but before that let me explain that each of our servers is connected through 2x 10gb network directly to leaf switch in the rack and each rack is connected to the spine at 160gbps

and considering the number of vms we run per server it is highly unlikely that the limitation is related to having other vms in same server using the full 20gbps bandwidth

Also our uplinks are underutilized and always under 50% usage so that is not the cause of the issue

to test the issue we did the following 2 tests
1. ipref test between 2 vms each vm in different rack we ran the test for 45 min and we are constantly getting 956mbps with no fluctuation
2. ipref test between 1 of our vms and test vm in ovh canada
we got constant 490mbps with no fluctuations (i think ovh vm is limited to 500mbps)

Based on that I think the issue for the user here is related to their own home connection that they may do traffic shaping , also it could be possible that any carrier between us and them do traffic shaping as well

noobjockeys

If you think you are going to receive a guaranteed 1GB port with a $30 year VPS then you need to obtain a psychological examination.

fluffernutter

@servarica_hani said:
to test the issue we did the following 2 tests
1. ipref test between 2 vms each vm in different rack we ran the test for 45 min and we are constantly getting 956mbps with no fluctuation
2. ipref test between 1 of our vms and test vm in ovh canada
we got constant 490mbps with no fluctuations (i think ovh vm is limited to 500mbps)

Servarica runs a fantastic network and I'm generally able to push gigabit to anything I'm targeting, if you're having issues with their network it's almost 100% an issue on your end. Massive +1 for servarica, extremely premium provider.

TimboJones

@rackabuser said:

@jar said:
A 1gbps pipe and card do not always equal your ability to see 1gbps at your chosen end point. This is an issue as old as time, and you'll never be right on it with the given rationale. If you're paying for a dedicated line and you've verified with every upstream along the path that it can be had, only then do you have room to start talking like this.

I get that. I get providers are overselling and that the 1Gbps or 10Gbps is spread across customers over one node.

My point is the way things are presented to consumers is dishonest.

Providers should say something like 1Gbps per node, 10 VMs per node, 100Mbps guaranteed per VM.

Without that information, 1, 10, 100 Gbps is meaningless.

Who and what claims? Saying what the port is, isn't lying. Nobody is guaranteeing you anything, you need a dedicated line to yourself for that. Otherwise, you're a combination of wishful thinking and misunderstanding.

Without specific advertisement and result, your post is meaningless.

TimboJones

@rackabuser said:
I think you misunderstand how things work at a technical level. Distance affects latency. Bandwitdth is not affected by distance. If Hetzner has poor peering to the USA, that is something else.

That doesn't make sense. Bandwidth is definitely affected by distance since its affected by latency which is physically related to distance.

You're probably trying to make some argument about the number of lanes on a road vs length of a road, but that's irrelevant.

craigb

@noobjockeys said:
If you think you are going to receive a guaranteed 1GB port with a $30 year VPS then you need to obtain a psychological examination.

I don't think the op is saying that (might be wrong), I think he's saying that he wants better transparency and seems to endorse per VM network bandwidth quotas. I agree with the sentiment (be upfront, don't be obviously misleading) but the not his suggestion since it kills bursting (as providers would have zero headroom to leave burst capacity) and removes any motivation for more skilled providers balancing workloads in smart ways so everyone benefits from the shared infra.

P.S I read your handle as nobjockey and nearly wet myself.

MrLime

You need to be realistic with your expectations OP, and understand the reality of it.

risharde

@rackabuser said:
Got myself some VPS from different providers (RackNerd, BuyVM, ServerCheap and ServaRICA).

As soon as I got access, I ran yabs. ServerCheap and ServaRICA ran very close to 1Gbps up and down. RackNerd was hovering at around 300-400Mbps. BuyVM was not consistent but the speeds were much higher than the advertised 100Mbps.

But then, I ran iperf with my home 1Gbps fiber connection for over 10 minutes and most completely disintegrated.

RackNerd is NOT providing sustained 1Gbps. Most I could do after 10 minutes is shy of 150Mbps. I don't know why they call it Premium bandwitdh.

BuyVM is advertising 100Mbps unmetered and they say you only get 100Mbps per 4GB but the reality is you get better, sustained speeds out of their VM then what RackNerd can do (with one VM I was able to pull 260Mbps average for over an hour). NY was the fastest followed by Miami and Las Vegas came in dead last (a bit over 100Mbps).

ServerCheap gave me 180Mbps after 10 minutes.

Fastest was, by far, ServaRICA with 300Mbps after 30 minutes.

My understanding is the only way to get sustained speed is to get a dedi.

Is OVH any better? When they say 250Mbps unmetered on their VPS, is it a true, dedicated, sustained, 250Mbps or does it fall after a couple of minutes?

There should be a way to clearly identify and measure what is really provided. This shared bandwidth lottery is not good for consumers.

All I want is a passthrough proxy to run a VPN to my home. I don't care about RAM, NVMe, CPU.

I am making an assumption here, technically the speeds on burst are as advertised but the assumption is that they will throttle the 1gbs speed so no one vm saturates the port (at least to me, that would make logical sense). I am indeed curious about the ovh 250mbits, can you test that and let me know? I would myself but my isp doesn't give me anything the 1gbps link you have

VayVayKa

@rackabuser said:

@Advin said:
Also, just an FYI, Frantech/BuyVM actually advertises 1 Gbps Unmetered on their website.

Only when paying 30$USD+. Plus, Francisco often explained (I actually asked recently) you get 100Mbits guaranteed for every 4GB you buy (so for every 15$USD you get 100Mbps up to 120$ where you get 1Gbps).

This is just a guarantee that there will be NO BAN if you abuse bandwidth at this speed 24/7/365 on this tariff. It is in no way related to peak loads for short periods of time, when all the free bandwidth of the port is available without restrictions.

jsg

@Advin said:

@rackabuser said:

@Advin said:
It isn't always possible for providers to tell how many people are on an individual node. Usually, providers sell a lot of different plans, like 2GB/4GB/8GB/16GB so it tends to vary by a lot and there are bound to be future cancellations that would affect the number of VM's.

Most providers advertise 1 Gbps because it's a shared port. When you buy a VPS, you should be expecting the port to be shared with others as you are on a shared node. Most low end providers doesn't really expect people to put the port on full blast, only to occasionally burst to it. For a couple dollars per month, you really have to lower your expectations.

I understand what you are saying. But even then, it is relatively easy to tell the customers what is guaranteed.

Let's say you have a node that shares 32GB RAM and 1Gbps port. You have 1x16GB, 1x8GB, 1x4GB, and 2x2GB customers on that node.

Why wouldn't you be able to tell the 16GB customer he's getting a guaranteed sustained 500Mbps pipe and the 2GB customer he's getting a guaranteed sustained 62.5Mbps pipe?

Because the number of VM's on the node constantly changes. Let's say the customer with the 16GB plan cancels. What if people buy 2 x 8GB plans? That means there's another (new) customer.

Also, providers have so many nodes with so many different plans and so many different customers. It's impossible to guarantee how many people will be on each node.

Frankly, I think that's not true. After all knowing how many customers there are, how many products and of what kind are active and how many VMs with what kind and amount of resources on each node is the very core of your business! Plus, what weight do statements of a provider carry when actually (according to you) they are but vague guesses?

I do understand that almost no provider tells everything honestly and frankly and I do understand that a major part of marketing is the art of presenting nice lies and make potential customers believe what you want them to believe, but there must be limits. RAM must be RAM and not swap (unless expressely stated), the actual real available bandwidth for each customer must be clearly stated with a reasonable margin say, max. 20%.

Making people believe that they get 1 Gb/s for more than occasional 10 or 20 millisecond bursts simply is fraud in my view.

But of course there is the ugly monster at the core, the number of VMs per node aka "vCores per HWT" which pretty much every provider prefers to keep in the dark. Assuming 2 vCores per HWT (actually an assumption in favour of many providers here) and assuming a 32 HWT node the real bandwidth available is in the 15 - 20 Mb/s range - and that's already a generous assumption because guess where the bandwidth for "1 Gb/s bursts" comes from ... right, it comes from everybody's bandwidth.

So, it seems that @rackabuser isn't far off with his remarks.

xaoc

@rackabuser said:

@SirFoxy said:

@devp said:

@SirFoxy said: The best way to advertise port speed is something along the lines of "up to 1Gbps port speed."

Thats interinsic.

Yes.

In the same way, 1 Gbps would be implied to be shared.

When you rent an apartment, you don't expect to be able to use the whole building.

You have your own tiny slice of that building, and all other resources i.e. electricity, and water are shared within that building.

You don't specifically need to state everything for it to be understood by 9 out of 10 people. It's implied.

The thing is, the landlord is not telling the tenant he is renting a shared building with a shared parking lot. You get apartment #5 and parking lot #3.

Access point(stairs/elevator) is shared tho.

doughmanes

breaking news: a customer with no experience in the hosting industry just found out how the industry is with fine print

NerdUno

They're advertising their port speed, not their throughput speed to your desktop.

tpoll

@NerdUno said:
They're advertising their port speed, not their throughput speed to your desktop.

Valid point. Plus anyone with a VPS knows its shared, not dedicated.

realistic_customer

@rackabuser I haven't seen anyone else say it in this thread so I will be "the one" in every crowd.
Dude
1. Caveat Emptor!
2. You get what you pay for!

Unlike you who wants a superfast throughput for a VPS service, I want a stable server with great resources and a great price.

Now this is what I just got for $11.99 USD at servercheap.com
"NVMe-KVM-16GB

16 GB RAM
6 CPU Cores
120 GB NVMe Disk Space
KVM (Full Virtualization)
4 TB Bandwidth
Dallas, TX Datacenter
1 IPv4
/64 IPv6
Instant Setup
SolusVM Control Panel
Custom ISOs
10Gbps DDOS protection"

As a web admin who uses a lot few WordPress plugins which are resource hungry and is going to run about 5 websites for myself and my wife and some business associates that I know, you can't really ask for much more in a VPS hosting service for $11.99 (I'm unemployed right now so to avoid having my Frau wife lop my jewels off, I have to budget)

The main difference between someone who wants a VPN where you need sustained bandwidth, and a web "admin" like myself... I don't really care about sustained throughput because websites don't need sustained throughput because at most their going to take 156 milliseconds to grab most of my website and then the rest is mostly DL on demand. So even if I had 10,000 daily viewers, the chances of a medium website ever going over my throughput limit in 24 hrs. to have my server start throttling my bandwidth are rare to none.

Besides web guys usually use a CDN (like Bunny CDN and DNS which are practically free) so their data can be picked up across the globe quicker. The CDN holds most if not all of your website so the only thing it needs to pull is when there are updates for pages or posts, even then a good CDN pulls the data down so quickly in major data packets that it's still going to be a wash on your throughput allowance.

Besides with a website, the biggest chance of "speed" throttling will probably come from a DNS attack via a poor DNS provider. If you have a good premium DNS service with Anycast DNS pops and DNSSEC like NameCheap Premium DNS for $4.98 a year or Bunny DNS which only requires $1 minimum per month and a very generous DNS pull allowance for free...

Having stated the obvious and the rest of the story... If you just want a VPN with high continuous throughput, I would strongly recommend the Always free tier with Oracle. You can get an Ampere Arm processor server with up to 24 GB of ram and they have an always free VPN service. I think you're limited to 2 points of presence for the user but if you just want it for your own use, it would be "worth" it.

Weblogics

@realistic_customer said:
@rackabuser I haven't seen anyone else say it in this thread so I will be "the one" in every crowd.

Think you meant to say.
Don't necropost

mgcAna

Thanks @Weblogics for pointing it out. Lets see if OP comes back.

sandoz

No ones tells you that is 1Gbps fully dedicated. In that is in the website is different and you may have reason.

Just like ISPs do, they advertise 1Gbps others advertise UP TO 1Gbps.

Are those providers you mention said that is 1Gbps fully dedicated? Because 1Gbps can be shared... If no one tolds you that, you don't have reason.