Howdy, Stranger!

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


Looking for a AMD Ryzen 7950X VPS - 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.

Looking for a AMD Ryzen 7950X VPS

2»

Comments

  • layer7layer7 Member, Host Rep, LIR

    @hyperblast said:

    @layer7 said:

    @spywork said:
    Yabs ?

    # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
    #              Yet-Another-Bench-Script              #
    #                     v2024-01-01                    #
    # https://github.com/masonr/yet-another-bench-script #
    # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
    
    Tue Feb 27 22:34:17 UTC 2024
    
    Basic System Information:
    ---------------------------------
    Uptime     : 0 days, 0 hours, 2 minutes
    Processor  : AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D 16-Core Processor
    CPU cores  : 2 @ 4199.980 MHz
    AES-NI     : ✔ Enabled
    VM-x/AMD-V : ✔ Enabled
    RAM        : 7.8 GiB
    Swap       : 0.0 KiB
    Disk       : 236.2 GiB
    Distro     : Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm)
    Kernel     : 6.1.0-13-amd64
    VM Type    : KVM
    IPv4/IPv6  : ✔ Online / ✔ Online
    
    IPv6 Network Information:
    ---------------------------------
    ISP        : IP Interactive
    ASN        : AS29551 Aixit GmbH
    Host       : IP Interactive UG (haftungsbeschraenkt)
    Location   : Gelnhausen, Hesse (HE)
    Country    : Germany
    
    fio Disk Speed Tests (Mixed R/W 50/50) (Partition /dev/vda1):
    ---------------------------------
    Block Size | 4k            (IOPS) | 64k           (IOPS)
      ------   | ---            ----  | ----           ---- 
    Read       | 3.98 MB/s      (995) | 63.76 MB/s     (996)
    Write      | 4.00 MB/s     (1.0k) | 64.18 MB/s    (1.0k)
    Total      | 7.99 MB/s     (1.9k) | 127.95 MB/s   (1.9k)
               |                      |                     
    Block Size | 512k          (IOPS) | 1m            (IOPS)
      ------   | ---            ----  | ----           ---- 
    Read       | 369.41 MB/s    (721) | 352.47 MB/s    (344)
    Write      | 389.04 MB/s    (759) | 375.95 MB/s    (367)
    Total      | 758.46 MB/s   (1.4k) | 728.42 MB/s    (711)
    
    iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv4):
    ---------------------------------
    Provider        | Location (Link)           | Send Speed      | Recv Speed      | Ping           
    -----           | -----                     | ----            | ----            | ----           
    Clouvider       | London, UK (10G)          | 3.28 Gbits/sec  | 4.19 Gbits/sec  | 16.3 ms        
    Scaleway        | Paris, FR (10G)           | 4.75 Gbits/sec  | 4.19 Gbits/sec  | 9.36 ms        
    NovoServe       | North Holland, NL (40G)   | 4.27 Gbits/sec  | 4.18 Gbits/sec  | 11.0 ms        
    Uztelecom       | Tashkent, UZ (10G)        | 763 Mbits/sec   | 1.12 Gbits/sec  | 76.7 ms        
    Clouvider       | NYC, NY, US (10G)         | busy            | 1.43 Gbits/sec  | 86.1 ms        
    Clouvider       | Dallas, TX, US (10G)      | 440 Mbits/sec   | 1.57 Gbits/sec  | 115 ms         
    Clouvider       | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 621 Mbits/sec   | 998 Mbits/sec   | 149 ms         
    
    iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv6):
    ---------------------------------
    Provider        | Location (Link)           | Send Speed      | Recv Speed      | Ping           
    -----           | -----                     | ----            | ----            | ----           
    Clouvider       | London, UK (10G)          | 2.75 Gbits/sec  | 4.24 Gbits/sec  | 16.3 ms        
    Scaleway        | Paris, FR (10G)           | 4.79 Gbits/sec  | 4.12 Gbits/sec  | 9.79 ms        
    NovoServe       | North Holland, NL (40G)   | 3.16 Gbits/sec  | 4.11 Gbits/sec  | 11.0 ms        
    Uztelecom       | Tashkent, UZ (10G)        | 1.04 Gbits/sec  | 749 Mbits/sec   | 76.6 ms        
    Clouvider       | NYC, NY, US (10G)         | 1.03 Gbits/sec  | 2.17 Gbits/sec  | 86.1 ms        
    Clouvider       | Dallas, TX, US (10G)      | 519 Mbits/sec   | 1.16 Gbits/sec  | 115 ms         
    Clouvider       | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 548 Mbits/sec   | 910 Mbits/sec   | 149 ms         
    
    Running GB6 benchmark test... *cue elevator music*
    Geekbench 6 Benchmark Test:
    ---------------------------------
    Test            | Value                         
                    |                               
    Single Core     | 2794                          
    Multi Core      | 5078                          
    Full Test       | https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/5095659
    
    YABS completed in 12 min 14 sec
    

    disc speed for nvme very low. other values interesing!

    @lukast__ said:

    @hyperblast said: disc speed for nvme very low

    That is the only disadvantage I noticed so far at layer7 (they use Ceph), the disk speed is low and varies greatly between benchmarks (4k is very constant, 1m/512k is mostly between 500 MB/s to 2 GB/s (read+write)), although in the last week the disk speed did increase (maybe because they added the new ryzen servers?).
    The CPU and the network was very stable and had hardly any variances.

    Hi,

    two things:

    1. This Ryzen offer is operating with local storage, NOT CEPH.
      Its operating with ZFS Storage that works on 128k blocksize ( which is natural for ZFS ).
      So any value below 128k will be unnaturally low.

    2. About this whole yabs benchmarking with IO:

    I suggest you to check how yabs is testing. They are using fio to test, and the settings they are using are optimized for good old local blockstorage.

    That means that as soon as you are using some modern like filesystem ( CEPH, ZFS, ... what ever does not operate on the old 4k blocksize and will in general behave differently ) you can just not trust this numbers. What ever is written there, just forget it. Its if ever a hint to get a clue. But its just not reality.

    If you are just using a disk ( no matter if spinning / ssd / NVMe / tomatoes / what ever ) and using a vanilla FS like xfs, ext3/4 or LVM, THEN this yabs alias fio will show something that is close to reality.

    But if not, then simply not. And that does not mean that the servers are bad or slow or what ever.

    Or do you really think that lokal NVMe drives in a ZFS can perform with 4 MB/s write or read speed? Or even CEPH or even a USB drive. No, it cant. Should be quiet obvious actually ;)

    This yabs fio testing can be simply ignored as soon as you just see complete unrealistic numbers.

    That goes for both directions. So if you see that what ever works with tons of GB(it)/s then you will know that this can not be reality aswell.

    There are other tests like https://bench.sh/ which are not using fio but dd. Its testing with 512k bs which is also not realistic, but will be in more situations more accurate, but still no reality.

    IF IO performance is that important for you then you will just have to ask the provide what they use. Then you will know what you can expect. And if you dont have enough knowledge about that, then you will have to build up some minimum knowledge and understanding since you are about to rent a server as a serveradmin and maybe need some base for judgement to be able to compare offers between different providers.

  • in the end gb6 score is interesting. ideally 3000+ ;)

  • layer7layer7 Member, Host Rep, LIR

    @hyperblast said:
    in the end gb6 score is interesting. ideally 3000+ ;)

    Hi,

    yes, this geekbench is a very clear thing that only depends on the CPU capability to math what ever algorithm(s) this geekbench actually maths. Its perfectly compareable and not depending on anything else but the test subject...

    Also if RAM speed would be tested ( which would be actually with the cpu a quiet useful test ), it could give you a good information about what performance this system will be able to deliver.

    That would be nice to build it in...

  • @layer7 said: This Ryzen offer is operating with local storage, NOT CEPH.

    Sorry, I assumed that you use Ceph because you say in your knowledgebase:

    In our case, we usually use network storage in our storage backends, usually CEPH.


    @layer7 said: Also if RAM speed would be tested ( which would be actually with the cpu a quiet useful test ), it could give you a good information about what performance this system will be able to deliver.

    I think that the geekbench score does (a bit at least) depend also on memory speed, if not it could simply be tested with dd+ramdisk.

  • v3ngv3ng Member, Patron Provider

    @layer7 said:
    Hi,

    two things:

    1. This Ryzen offer is operating with local storage, NOT CEPH.
      Its operating with ZFS Storage that works on 128k blocksize ( which is natural for ZFS ).
      So any value below 128k will be unnaturally low.

    2. About this whole yabs benchmarking with IO:

    I suggest you to check how yabs is testing. They are using fio to test, and the settings they are using are optimized for good old local blockstorage.

    That means that as soon as you are using some modern like filesystem ( CEPH, ZFS, ... what ever does not operate on the old 4k blocksize and will in general behave differently ) you can just not trust this numbers. What ever is written there, just forget it. Its if ever a hint to get a clue. But its just not reality.

    If you are just using a disk ( no matter if spinning / ssd / NVMe / tomatoes / what ever ) and using a vanilla FS like xfs, ext3/4 or LVM, THEN this yabs alias fio will show something that is close to reality.

    But if not, then simply not. And that does not mean that the servers are bad or slow or what ever.

    Or do you really think that lokal NVMe drives in a ZFS can perform with 4 MB/s write or read speed? Or even CEPH or even a USB drive. No, it cant. Should be quiet obvious actually ;)

    This yabs fio testing can be simply ignored as soon as you just see complete unrealistic numbers.

    That goes for both directions. So if you see that what ever works with tons of GB(it)/s then you will know that this can not be reality aswell.

    There are other tests like https://bench.sh/ which are not using fio but dd. Its testing with 512k bs which is also not realistic, but will be in more situations more accurate, but still no reality.

    IF IO performance is that important for you then you will just have to ask the provide what they use. Then you will know what you can expect. And if you dont have enough knowledge about that, then you will have to build up some minimum knowledge and understanding since you are about to rent a server as a serveradmin and maybe need some base for judgement to be able to compare offers between different providers.

    It might come down to the NVMe models used.
    Using consumer-grade drives without power loss protection (PLP), or even worse, without DRAM, will result in a significant performance hit.

  • CPU Model          : QEMU Virtual CPU version 2.5+
     CPU Cores          : 1 @ 3491.962 MHz
     CPU Cache          : 16384 KB
     AES-NI             : ? Disabled
     VM-x/AMD-V         : ? Disabled
     Total Disk         : 9.9 GB (992.1 MB Used)
     Total Mem          : 7.8 GB (72.3 MB Used)
     System uptime      : 0 days, 0 hour 28 min
     Load average       : 0.15, 0.18, 0.08
     OS                 : Debian GNU/Linux 11
     Arch               : x86_64 (64 Bit)
     Kernel             : 5.10.0-8-amd64
     TCP CC             : cubic
     Virtualization     : KVM
     IPv4/IPv6          : ? Online / ? Offline
     Organization       : AS199868 DpkgSoft Computers, Ltd.
     Location           : Frankfurt am Main / DE
     Region             : Hesse
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
     I/O Speed(1st run) : 331 MB/s
     I/O Speed(2nd run) : 514 MB/s
     I/O Speed(3rd run) : 489 MB/s
     I/O Speed(average) : 444.7 MB/s
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
     Node Name        Upload Speed      Download Speed      Latency     
     Speedtest.net    100.87 Mbps       97.63 Mbps          6.11 ms     
     Los Angeles, US  102.72 Mbps       100.14 Mbps         152.07 ms   
     Dallas, US       103.01 Mbps       100.30 Mbps         124.24 ms   
     Montreal, CA     98.04 Mbps        99.69 Mbps          98.71 ms    
     Paris, FR        101.57 Mbps       97.64 Mbps          14.47 ms    
     Amsterdam, NL    101.27 Mbps       97.71 Mbps          13.17 ms    
     Shanghai, CN     109.96 Mbps       101.91 Mbps         289.45 ms   
     Hongkong, CN     105.69 Mbps       98.07 Mbps          200.45 ms   
     Mumbai, IN       103.48 Mbps       106.03 Mbps         216.76 ms   
     Singapore, SG    108.03 Mbps       115.43 Mbps         314.57 ms   
     Tokyo, JP        111.43 Mbps       105.47 Mbps         265.58 ms   
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
     Finished in        : 5 min 28 sec
    
Sign In or Register to comment.