Howdy, Stranger!

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


Netcup pauses all G11 Root Server orders and reduces performance by 50% - Page 2
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.

Netcup pauses all G11 Root Server orders and reduces performance by 50%

2

Comments

  • dev_vpsdev_vps Member
    edited May 31

    @Moopah said:

    @dev_vps said:
    That is why it is recommended to pin both the HT to the VDS for optimal performance

    Just like @crunchbits VDS

    But that means you can't make more $$$ by selling each pinned thread as a dedicated Core

    But most customers are not that technically savvy ….

    on a serious note, $8 VDS is an incredible value from @crunchbits

  • MoopahMoopah Member

    @dev_vps said:

    @Moopah said:

    @dev_vps said:
    That is why it is recommended to pin both the HT to the VDS for optimal performance

    Just like @crunchbits VDS

    But that means you can't make more $$$ by selling each pinned thread as a dedicated Core

    But most customers are not that technically savvy ….

    on a serious note, $8 VDS is an incredible value from @crunchbits

    This is a serious thread, I assure you.

    Can confirm, have idlers at @crunchbits in Spokane with excellent idling performance (I never checked again after the first YABS but i presume performance is still good)

  • MoopahMoopah Member
    edited May 31

    Back somewhat on the original topic, what are people's thoughts (those who actual run stuff instead of idling like me) if the the performance of their VDS with dedicated cores drops by 50% over a span of days.

    Would it be considered acceptable because technically you're still getting dedicated cores, just slower due automatic CPU downclocking ?
    Technically there is no fraud or deception by the hosting provider as there is no performance guarantee. Only that you will receive the specific CPU model and # of dedicated cores.

    Thanked by 1Peppery9
  • @Moopah said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @crunchbits said:

    Well, ignoring the low power aspect for a second that's still not overly impressive given (hacked) Xeons managed to boost on like at least half their cores while keeping base on the others.

    I do think it's impressive when you consider ~200W for 64 cores in a single socket (especially at 2019 launch date) where even two beefy Xeons E5/G1 Scalable CPUs weren't getting to 64 cores while being double the wattage. It just comes down to use case. The EPYC will still boost well on half the cores (32 of 64 was still pretty close to unloaded score) but the further you push it the quicker it diminishes.

    Sure, it's kind of an achievement. Still in my opinion it's somewhat underwhelming. There's a lot of cores that don't do much once you start using them. Maybe they could do 1024 cores next. If one tries to actually use them all they degrade to C64 performance and run like a 15 year old desktop PC but the huge number will look nice on paper ;)

    Technically AMD advertises cores and threads separate and doesn't market their threads as actual cores. It's primarily in the hosting space where vCores and vCPUs are used instead instead of "threads" that lead to confusion on the true performance of a dedicated "core" due to 2 vCPUs contending on a single physical core and sharing cache.

    Well, 1024 cores would obviously be 2048 threads. Big, big numbers of Casio calculators on a single chip.

    Thanked by 1emgh
  • edited May 31

    @Moopah said:
    Back somewhat on the original topic, what are people's thoughts (those who actual run stuff instead of idling like me) if the the performance of their VDS with dedicated cores drops by 50% over a span of days.

    Would it be considered acceptable because technically you're still getting dedicated cores, just slower due automatic CPU downclocking ?
    Technically there is no fraud or deception by the hosting provider as there is no performance guarantee. Only that you will receive the specific CPU model and # of dedicated cores.

    Well, outside of maybe obviously bad setups (bad cooling and such causing heavy thermal throttle and so on) i'd say it's natural. Crappy but natural. In the end it probably comes down to either factoring in a doubled performance requirement or looking for providers using less annoying CPUs. That obviously assumes that the drop isn't fixable by some realistic change (i.e. not like whipping out a soldering iron and messing with the actual electronics or something like that) and there is no intentional crippling involved.

  • Can you see cpu steal on it now? :o

  • MoopahMoopah Member

    @dragonfsky said:
    Can you see cpu steal on it now? :o

    Less than 0.5% steal under all core stress test

    Thanked by 1JasonM
  • faleddofaleddo Member

    @dragonfsky said:
    Can you see cpu steal on it now? :o

    In a week:
    Min 0,008%
    Average: 1%
    Max: 6,4%

    But with gb6 score that dropped by half, wp-benchmark also always failed to test. My successfull test scored only 7,1 when gb6 score about 1500. Its scored 9,4 when gb6 score about 2000.

  • itsdeadjimitsdeadjim Member
    edited May 31

    Who would have thought. I guess the next shocking discovery for this community of genius and cryptokarens is to see performance degrade when mining on pined cores.

    (edit: not mining, I meant using computation resources to get rewards)

    Thanked by 2emgh Falzo
  • CalmDownCalmDown Member

    You don't understand. They are bigger than avoro. They can handle it. They have DEDICATED. YOU"RE LYING. LYER!!! fellow, aka @online7237 can't lie! He is always right.

    Thanked by 3emgh dataforest nezam05
  • faleddofaleddo Member

    @faleddo said:

    @dragonfsky said:
    Can you see cpu steal on it now? :o

    In a week:
    Min 0,008%
    Average: 1%
    Max: 6,4%

    But with gb6 score that dropped by half, wp-benchmark also always failed to test. My successfull test scored only 7,1 when gb6 score about 1500. Its scored 9,4 when gb6 score about 2000.

    Finally wp-benchmark can finish the benchmark. Now I get only 4.5 in wp-benchmark. :(

    Thanked by 1COLBYLICIOUS
  • itsdeadjimitsdeadjim Member
    edited May 31

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @Moopah said:
    Back somewhat on the original topic, what are people's thoughts (those who actual run stuff instead of idling like me) if the the performance of their VDS with dedicated cores drops by 50% over a span of days.

    Would it be considered acceptable because technically you're still getting dedicated cores, just slower due automatic CPU downclocking ?
    Technically there is no fraud or deception by the hosting provider as there is no performance guarantee. Only that you will receive the specific CPU model and # of dedicated cores.

    Well, outside of maybe obviously bad setups (bad cooling and such causing heavy thermal throttle and so on) i'd say it's natural. Crappy but natural. In the end it probably comes down to either factoring in a doubled performance requirement or looking for providers using less annoying CPUs. That obviously assumes that the drop isn't fixable by some realistic change (i.e. not like whipping out a soldering iron and messing with the actual electronics or something like that) and there is no intentional crippling involved.

    Yeah and the best part is that in this case it is better to migrate the VM on a different machine. Oh, wait...

  • gmsgms Member

    Same guy from the avoro thread I guess.

  • itsdeadjimitsdeadjim Member
    edited May 31

    Edit: sorry I thought you were referring to my post

  • yokowasisyokowasis Member

    Hey, as long as the steal is < 3% you can't really proof that the core is not dedicated.

  • This makes me a little confused. It seems that the dedicated vcpu core cannot obtain a stable and dedicated cpu core. >:) >:) >:)

  • dataforestdataforest Member, Patron Provider

    Sorry, we recognized the market for Quilibrium Nodes and bought up Netcup to collect rewards - just kidding :)

    The steal is interesting, I can't imagine that the steal is only 6% despite a 50% loss in performance. But I don't want to speak badly of our colleagues at netcup, I hardly believe that the products from Hetzner, netcup and ours are designed for this and that netcup will sooner or later throw out these Quilibrium Nodes, they are already banned at Hetzner.

  • edited May 31

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @Moopah said:
    Back somewhat on the original topic, what are people's thoughts (those who actual run stuff instead of idling like me) if the the performance of their VDS with dedicated cores drops by 50% over a span of days.

    Would it be considered acceptable because technically you're still getting dedicated cores, just slower due automatic CPU downclocking ?
    Technically there is no fraud or deception by the hosting provider as there is no performance guarantee. Only that you will receive the specific CPU model and # of dedicated cores.

    Well, outside of maybe obviously bad setups (bad cooling and such causing heavy thermal throttle and so on) i'd say it's natural. Crappy but natural. In the end it probably comes down to either factoring in a doubled performance requirement or looking for providers using less annoying CPUs. That obviously assumes that the drop isn't fixable by some realistic change (i.e. not like whipping out a soldering iron and messing with the actual electronics or something like that) and there is no intentional crippling involved.

    Yeah and the best part is that in this case it is better to migrate the VM on a different machine. Oh, wait...

    What are you even trying to say here? I mean, i probably shouldn't ask but then i'm kind of a masochist sometimes, so what does migration have to do with any of this? Do you realize that this is about the effect of architectural quirks and not about your pet topic? Are you trolling?

  • @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @Moopah said:
    Back somewhat on the original topic, what are people's thoughts (those who actual run stuff instead of idling like me) if the the performance of their VDS with dedicated cores drops by 50% over a span of days.

    Would it be considered acceptable because technically you're still getting dedicated cores, just slower due automatic CPU downclocking ?
    Technically there is no fraud or deception by the hosting provider as there is no performance guarantee. Only that you will receive the specific CPU model and # of dedicated cores.

    Well, outside of maybe obviously bad setups (bad cooling and such causing heavy thermal throttle and so on) i'd say it's natural. Crappy but natural. In the end it probably comes down to either factoring in a doubled performance requirement or looking for providers using less annoying CPUs. That obviously assumes that the drop isn't fixable by some realistic change (i.e. not like whipping out a soldering iron and messing with the actual electronics or something like that) and there is no intentional crippling involved.

    Yeah and the best part is that in this case it is better to migrate the VM on a different machine. Oh, wait...

    What are you even trying to say here? I mean, i probably shouldn't ask but then i'm kind of a masochist sometimes, so what does migration have to do with any of this? Do you realize that this is about the effect of architectural quirks and not about your pet topic? Are you trolling?

    Well I prefer you not making assumptions on what is my pet topic.

  • @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @Moopah said:
    Back somewhat on the original topic, what are people's thoughts (those who actual run stuff instead of idling like me) if the the performance of their VDS with dedicated cores drops by 50% over a span of days.

    Would it be considered acceptable because technically you're still getting dedicated cores, just slower due automatic CPU downclocking ?
    Technically there is no fraud or deception by the hosting provider as there is no performance guarantee. Only that you will receive the specific CPU model and # of dedicated cores.

    Well, outside of maybe obviously bad setups (bad cooling and such causing heavy thermal throttle and so on) i'd say it's natural. Crappy but natural. In the end it probably comes down to either factoring in a doubled performance requirement or looking for providers using less annoying CPUs. That obviously assumes that the drop isn't fixable by some realistic change (i.e. not like whipping out a soldering iron and messing with the actual electronics or something like that) and there is no intentional crippling involved.

    Yeah and the best part is that in this case it is better to migrate the VM on a different machine. Oh, wait...

    What are you even trying to say here? I mean, i probably shouldn't ask but then i'm kind of a masochist sometimes, so what does migration have to do with any of this? Do you realize that this is about the effect of architectural quirks and not about your pet topic? Are you trolling?

    Well I prefer you not making assumptions on what is my pet topic.

    Are you going to cry if i do it again?

  • @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @Moopah said:
    Back somewhat on the original topic, what are people's thoughts (those who actual run stuff instead of idling like me) if the the performance of their VDS with dedicated cores drops by 50% over a span of days.

    Would it be considered acceptable because technically you're still getting dedicated cores, just slower due automatic CPU downclocking ?
    Technically there is no fraud or deception by the hosting provider as there is no performance guarantee. Only that you will receive the specific CPU model and # of dedicated cores.

    Well, outside of maybe obviously bad setups (bad cooling and such causing heavy thermal throttle and so on) i'd say it's natural. Crappy but natural. In the end it probably comes down to either factoring in a doubled performance requirement or looking for providers using less annoying CPUs. That obviously assumes that the drop isn't fixable by some realistic change (i.e. not like whipping out a soldering iron and messing with the actual electronics or something like that) and there is no intentional crippling involved.

    Yeah and the best part is that in this case it is better to migrate the VM on a different machine. Oh, wait...

    What are you even trying to say here? I mean, i probably shouldn't ask but then i'm kind of a masochist sometimes, so what does migration have to do with any of this? Do you realize that this is about the effect of architectural quirks and not about your pet topic? Are you trolling?

    Well I prefer you not making assumptions on what is my pet topic.

    Are you going to cry if i do it again?

    No, it's just personal preference.

  • edited May 31

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @Moopah said:
    Back somewhat on the original topic, what are people's thoughts (those who actual run stuff instead of idling like me) if the the performance of their VDS with dedicated cores drops by 50% over a span of days.

    Would it be considered acceptable because technically you're still getting dedicated cores, just slower due automatic CPU downclocking ?
    Technically there is no fraud or deception by the hosting provider as there is no performance guarantee. Only that you will receive the specific CPU model and # of dedicated cores.

    Well, outside of maybe obviously bad setups (bad cooling and such causing heavy thermal throttle and so on) i'd say it's natural. Crappy but natural. In the end it probably comes down to either factoring in a doubled performance requirement or looking for providers using less annoying CPUs. That obviously assumes that the drop isn't fixable by some realistic change (i.e. not like whipping out a soldering iron and messing with the actual electronics or something like that) and there is no intentional crippling involved.

    Yeah and the best part is that in this case it is better to migrate the VM on a different machine. Oh, wait...

    What are you even trying to say here? I mean, i probably shouldn't ask but then i'm kind of a masochist sometimes, so what does migration have to do with any of this? Do you realize that this is about the effect of architectural quirks and not about your pet topic? Are you trolling?

    Well I prefer you not making assumptions on what is my pet topic.

    Are you going to cry if i do it again?

    No, it's just personal preference.

    Like being a little princes instead of giving your posts content?

  • @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @Moopah said:
    Back somewhat on the original topic, what are people's thoughts (those who actual run stuff instead of idling like me) if the the performance of their VDS with dedicated cores drops by 50% over a span of days.

    Would it be considered acceptable because technically you're still getting dedicated cores, just slower due automatic CPU downclocking ?
    Technically there is no fraud or deception by the hosting provider as there is no performance guarantee. Only that you will receive the specific CPU model and # of dedicated cores.

    Well, outside of maybe obviously bad setups (bad cooling and such causing heavy thermal throttle and so on) i'd say it's natural. Crappy but natural. In the end it probably comes down to either factoring in a doubled performance requirement or looking for providers using less annoying CPUs. That obviously assumes that the drop isn't fixable by some realistic change (i.e. not like whipping out a soldering iron and messing with the actual electronics or something like that) and there is no intentional crippling involved.

    Yeah and the best part is that in this case it is better to migrate the VM on a different machine. Oh, wait...

    What are you even trying to say here? I mean, i probably shouldn't ask but then i'm kind of a masochist sometimes, so what does migration have to do with any of this? Do you realize that this is about the effect of architectural quirks and not about your pet topic? Are you trolling?

    Well I prefer you not making assumptions on what is my pet topic.

    Are you going to cry if i do it again?

    No, it's just personal preference.

    Like being a little princes instead of giving your posts content?

    Post content is there, just think more. I feel you can do this.

  • @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @Moopah said:
    Back somewhat on the original topic, what are people's thoughts (those who actual run stuff instead of idling like me) if the the performance of their VDS with dedicated cores drops by 50% over a span of days.

    Would it be considered acceptable because technically you're still getting dedicated cores, just slower due automatic CPU downclocking ?
    Technically there is no fraud or deception by the hosting provider as there is no performance guarantee. Only that you will receive the specific CPU model and # of dedicated cores.

    Well, outside of maybe obviously bad setups (bad cooling and such causing heavy thermal throttle and so on) i'd say it's natural. Crappy but natural. In the end it probably comes down to either factoring in a doubled performance requirement or looking for providers using less annoying CPUs. That obviously assumes that the drop isn't fixable by some realistic change (i.e. not like whipping out a soldering iron and messing with the actual electronics or something like that) and there is no intentional crippling involved.

    Yeah and the best part is that in this case it is better to migrate the VM on a different machine. Oh, wait...

    What are you even trying to say here? I mean, i probably shouldn't ask but then i'm kind of a masochist sometimes, so what does migration have to do with any of this? Do you realize that this is about the effect of architectural quirks and not about your pet topic? Are you trolling?

    Well I prefer you not making assumptions on what is my pet topic.

    Are you going to cry if i do it again?

    No, it's just personal preference.

    Like being a little princes instead of giving your posts content?

    Post content is there, just think more. I feel you can do this.

    Well, what can i say... I knew it was going to be masochistic. Thanks for the conversation (or whatever that was).

  • @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @Moopah said:
    Back somewhat on the original topic, what are people's thoughts (those who actual run stuff instead of idling like me) if the the performance of their VDS with dedicated cores drops by 50% over a span of days.

    Would it be considered acceptable because technically you're still getting dedicated cores, just slower due automatic CPU downclocking ?
    Technically there is no fraud or deception by the hosting provider as there is no performance guarantee. Only that you will receive the specific CPU model and # of dedicated cores.

    Well, outside of maybe obviously bad setups (bad cooling and such causing heavy thermal throttle and so on) i'd say it's natural. Crappy but natural. In the end it probably comes down to either factoring in a doubled performance requirement or looking for providers using less annoying CPUs. That obviously assumes that the drop isn't fixable by some realistic change (i.e. not like whipping out a soldering iron and messing with the actual electronics or something like that) and there is no intentional crippling involved.

    Yeah and the best part is that in this case it is better to migrate the VM on a different machine. Oh, wait...

    What are you even trying to say here? I mean, i probably shouldn't ask but then i'm kind of a masochist sometimes, so what does migration have to do with any of this? Do you realize that this is about the effect of architectural quirks and not about your pet topic? Are you trolling?

    Well I prefer you not making assumptions on what is my pet topic.

    Are you going to cry if i do it again?

    No, it's just personal preference.

    Like being a little princes instead of giving your posts content?

    Post content is there, just think more. I feel you can do this.

    Well, what can i say... I knew it was going to be masochistic. Thanks for the conversation (or whatever that was).

    No it was a personal attack. If you cannot understand what I am implying in what I say, you can just ignore the post.

  • @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @Moopah said:
    Back somewhat on the original topic, what are people's thoughts (those who actual run stuff instead of idling like me) if the the performance of their VDS with dedicated cores drops by 50% over a span of days.

    Would it be considered acceptable because technically you're still getting dedicated cores, just slower due automatic CPU downclocking ?
    Technically there is no fraud or deception by the hosting provider as there is no performance guarantee. Only that you will receive the specific CPU model and # of dedicated cores.

    Well, outside of maybe obviously bad setups (bad cooling and such causing heavy thermal throttle and so on) i'd say it's natural. Crappy but natural. In the end it probably comes down to either factoring in a doubled performance requirement or looking for providers using less annoying CPUs. That obviously assumes that the drop isn't fixable by some realistic change (i.e. not like whipping out a soldering iron and messing with the actual electronics or something like that) and there is no intentional crippling involved.

    Yeah and the best part is that in this case it is better to migrate the VM on a different machine. Oh, wait...

    What are you even trying to say here? I mean, i probably shouldn't ask but then i'm kind of a masochist sometimes, so what does migration have to do with any of this? Do you realize that this is about the effect of architectural quirks and not about your pet topic? Are you trolling?

    Well I prefer you not making assumptions on what is my pet topic.

    Are you going to cry if i do it again?

    No, it's just personal preference.

    Like being a little princes instead of giving your posts content?

    Post content is there, just think more. I feel you can do this.

    Well, what can i say... I knew it was going to be masochistic. Thanks for the conversation (or whatever that was).

    No it was a personal attack. If you cannot understand what I am implying in what I say, you can just ignore the post.

    Yeah, that's what i'd say too if i didn't have a sound explanation. Shitty rhetoric 1o1. Boring.

  • @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @itsdeadjim said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @Moopah said:
    Back somewhat on the original topic, what are people's thoughts (those who actual run stuff instead of idling like me) if the the performance of their VDS with dedicated cores drops by 50% over a span of days.

    Would it be considered acceptable because technically you're still getting dedicated cores, just slower due automatic CPU downclocking ?
    Technically there is no fraud or deception by the hosting provider as there is no performance guarantee. Only that you will receive the specific CPU model and # of dedicated cores.

    Well, outside of maybe obviously bad setups (bad cooling and such causing heavy thermal throttle and so on) i'd say it's natural. Crappy but natural. In the end it probably comes down to either factoring in a doubled performance requirement or looking for providers using less annoying CPUs. That obviously assumes that the drop isn't fixable by some realistic change (i.e. not like whipping out a soldering iron and messing with the actual electronics or something like that) and there is no intentional crippling involved.

    Yeah and the best part is that in this case it is better to migrate the VM on a different machine. Oh, wait...

    What are you even trying to say here? I mean, i probably shouldn't ask but then i'm kind of a masochist sometimes, so what does migration have to do with any of this? Do you realize that this is about the effect of architectural quirks and not about your pet topic? Are you trolling?

    Well I prefer you not making assumptions on what is my pet topic.

    Are you going to cry if i do it again?

    No, it's just personal preference.

    Like being a little princes instead of giving your posts content?

    Post content is there, just think more. I feel you can do this.

    Well, what can i say... I knew it was going to be masochistic. Thanks for the conversation (or whatever that was).

    No it was a personal attack. If you cannot understand what I am implying in what I say, you can just ignore the post.

    Yeah, that's what i'd say too if i didn't have a sound explanation. Shitty rhetoric 1o1. Boring.

    Or you could be more polite when asking your rhetorical questions.

  • vikiahm3dvikiahm3d Member

    @totally_not_banned & @itsdeadjim HakunaMatata!!

    Thanked by 1itsdeadjim
  • MoopahMoopah Member

    @gms said:
    Same guy from the avoro thread I guess.

    Which guy? I am a chicken. 🐔

    Thanked by 1emgh
  • DataWagonDataWagon Member, Patron Provider

    95% of VPS offers are not designed for workloads like this. There is a reason it costs way more to rent real dedicated resources in the form of dedicated servers.

Sign In or Register to comment.