Howdy, Stranger!

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


Shells Virtual Desktop
BMail.ag - Secure Email Service
Server.net
CPLicense.net
VPS Server
Buy VPN
Vultr
VMs for AI
HostDare
ReliableSite White-Label Dedicated Hosting for Resellers
InterServer VPS
BMail.ag - Secure Email Service
Best VPN
High-Performance Bare Metal Server Solutions
Karvl.com
Server Mania Cloud Hosting
DataWagon Hosting
AlphaVPS Hosting
Evoxt.com
Clouvider
Godlike VPS
VPS Hosting with NVMe
Residential IPs in the US & 4G Mobile Proxies in EU & US with Unlimited Bandwidth
ReliableSite White-Label Dedicated Hosting for Resellers
Shells Virtual Desktop
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.

AMD GENOA starting at (4c/16gb/200gb) @4,95€ VPS Deal at ph24 [...]

18911131439

Comments

  • loayloay Member
    edited September 2024

    @loay said:

    @hyperblast said:

    @dev_vps said:

    @hyperblast said:

    how run run gb5 on windows on command line? ;)

    GB5 and GB6 are not completely accurate on Windows Server OS.

    values that fall by 5-10% every day are also not accurate, regardless of the basis of calculation.

    i would roughly expect something like this. too much to ask?
    https://lowendtalk.com/discussion/197609/vps-from-berohost-available-for-transfer

    Bero-host is very stable in performance. I run windows server on a 10€/ ipv6 only yearly deal I got from them.
    https://lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/3891691/#Comment_3891691

    Bero-host GB6 from windows 2022 server:
    Single Core 1458
    Multi Core 2611
    https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/7702611

    Result is almost equivalent to January test with Debian :wink:

    Geekbench 6 Benchmark Test:
    ---------------------------------
    Test            | Value
                    |
    Single Core     | 1499
    Multi Core      | 2747
    Full Test       | https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4435046
    
    Thanked by 1hyperblast
  • @hyperblast said:

    @Cybr said:

    @radex said:

    [...]

    To put things into perspective, even the lowest end shit-tier providers like Evos (who is now banned from LET) and HT-Hosting (who is infamous for being unstable) have provided better service and support than Fame.

    oioioi. and both are hard to beat.

    Fresh one, its so bad :D

    # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
    #              Yet-Another-Bench-Script              #
    #                     v2024-06-09                    #
    # https://github.com/masonr/yet-another-bench-script #
    # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
    
    Di 10. Sep 14:35:21 CEST 2024
    
    Basic System Information:
    ---------------------------------
    Uptime     : 10 days, 8 hours, 14 minutes
    Processor  : AMD EPYC 7443 24-Core Processor
    CPU cores  : 12 @ 2849.998 MHz
    AES-NI     : ✔ Enabled
    VM-x/AMD-V : ✔ Enabled
    RAM        : 47.0 GiB
    Swap       : 1024.0 MiB
    Disk       : 391.6 GiB
    Distro     : Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm)
    Kernel     : 6.1.0-23-amd64
    VM Type    : KVM
    IPv4/IPv6  : ✔ Online / ✔ Online
    
    IPv6 Network Information:
    ---------------------------------
    ISP        : Oliver Horscht is trading as \"SYNLINQ\"
    ASN        : AS44486 Oliver Horscht is trading as \"SYNLINQ\"
    Host       : FameSystems GmbH \u0026 Co. KG
    Location   : Frankfurt am Main, Hesse (HE)
    Country    : Germany
    
    fio Disk Speed Tests (Mixed R/W 50/50) (Partition /dev/sda3):
    ---------------------------------
    Block Size | 4k            (IOPS) | 64k           (IOPS)
      ------   | ---            ----  | ----           ----
    Read       | 236.14 MB/s  (59.0k) | 3.18 GB/s    (49.7k)
    Write      | 236.77 MB/s  (59.1k) | 3.20 GB/s    (50.0k)
    Total      | 472.91 MB/s (118.2k) | 6.38 GB/s    (99.7k)
               |                      |
    Block Size | 512k          (IOPS) | 1m            (IOPS)
      ------   | ---            ----  | ----           ----
    Read       | 1.39 GB/s     (2.7k) | 5.42 GB/s     (5.2k)
    Write      | 1.46 GB/s     (2.8k) | 5.78 GB/s     (5.6k)
    Total      | 2.86 GB/s     (5.5k) | 11.21 GB/s   (10.9k)
    
    Geekbench 6 Benchmark Test:
    ---------------------------------
    Test            | Value
                    |
    Single Core     | 1858
    Multi Core      | 12073
    Full Test       | https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/7702881
    
    YABS completed in 5 min 33 sec
    
  • FalzoFalzo Member
    edited September 2024
    # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
    #              Yet-Another-Bench-Script              #
    #                     v2024-06-09                    #
    # https://github.com/masonr/yet-another-bench-script #
    # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
    
    Tue Sep 10 11:19:18 AM CEST 2024
    
    Basic System Information:
    ---------------------------------
    Uptime     : 6 days, 2 hours, 45 minutes
    Processor  : AMD EPYC 9554 64-Core Processor
    CPU cores  : 4 @ 3099.996 MHz
    AES-NI     : ✔ Enabled
    VM-x/AMD-V : ✔ Enabled
    RAM        : 15.6 GiB
    Swap       : 0.0 KiB
    Disk       : 196.8 GiB
    Distro     : Ubuntu 24.04 LTS
    Kernel     : 6.8.0-41-generic
    VM Type    : KVM
    IPv4/IPv6  : ✔ Online / ✔ Online
    
    IPv6 Network Information:
    ---------------------------------
    ISP        : Oliver Horscht is trading as \"SYNLINQ\"
    ASN        : AS44486 Oliver Horscht is trading as \"SYNLINQ\"
    Host       : Prohosting24
    Location   : Frankfurt am Main, Hesse (HE)
    Country    : Germany
    
    fio Disk Speed Tests (Mixed R/W 50/50) (Partition /dev/sda2):
    ---------------------------------
    Block Size | 4k            (IOPS) | 64k           (IOPS)
      ------   | ---            ----  | ----           ---- 
    Read       | 25.60 MB/s    (6.4k) | 333.01 MB/s   (5.2k)
    Write      | 25.65 MB/s    (6.4k) | 334.76 MB/s   (5.2k)
    Total      | 51.26 MB/s   (12.8k) | 667.77 MB/s  (10.4k)
               |                      |                     
    Block Size | 512k          (IOPS) | 1m            (IOPS)
      ------   | ---            ----  | ----           ---- 
    Read       | 1.36 GB/s     (2.6k) | 1.00 GB/s      (982)
    Write      | 1.43 GB/s     (2.7k) | 1.07 GB/s     (1.0k)
    Total      | 2.79 GB/s     (5.4k) | 2.07 GB/s     (2.0k)
    
    iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv4):
    ---------------------------------
    Provider        | Location (Link)           | Send Speed      | Recv Speed      | Ping           
    -----           | -----                     | ----            | ----            | ----           
    Clouvider       | London, UK (10G)          | 1.97 Gbits/sec  | 1.94 Gbits/sec  | 13.3 ms        
    Eranium         | Amsterdam, NL (100G)      | 1.97 Gbits/sec  | 1.97 Gbits/sec  | 7.26 ms        
    Uztelecom       | Tashkent, UZ (10G)        | 603 Mbits/sec   | 1.84 Gbits/sec  | 70.9 ms        
    Leaseweb        | Singapore, SG (10G)       | 336 Mbits/sec   | busy            | 160 ms         
    Clouvider       | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 365 Mbits/sec   | 1.38 Gbits/sec  | 144 ms         
    Leaseweb        | NYC, NY, US (10G)         | 390 Mbits/sec   | 1.72 Gbits/sec  | 81.9 ms        
    Edgoo           | Sao Paulo, BR (1G)        | 370 Mbits/sec   | 1.08 Gbits/sec  | 199 ms         
    
    iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv6):
    ---------------------------------
    Provider        | Location (Link)           | Send Speed      | Recv Speed      | Ping           
    -----           | -----                     | ----            | ----            | ----           
    Clouvider       | London, UK (10G)          | 2.02 Gbits/sec  | 1.91 Gbits/sec  | 11.5 ms        
    Eranium         | Amsterdam, NL (100G)      | 2.05 Gbits/sec  | 1.93 Gbits/sec  | 7.22 ms        
    Uztelecom       | Tashkent, UZ (10G)        | 519 Mbits/sec   | 1.84 Gbits/sec  | 70.9 ms        
    Leaseweb        | Singapore, SG (10G)       | busy            | 267 Mbits/sec   | 771 ms         
    Clouvider       | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 526 Mbits/sec   | 65.8 Mbits/sec  | 143 ms         
    Leaseweb        | NYC, NY, US (10G)         | 437 Mbits/sec   | 1.85 Gbits/sec  | 81.8 ms        
    Edgoo           | Sao Paulo, BR (1G)        | 368 Mbits/sec   | 1.07 Gbits/sec  | 197 ms         
    
    Geekbench 6 Benchmark Test:
    ---------------------------------
    Test            | Value                         
                    |                               
    Single Core     | 1458                          
    Multi Core      | 4315                          
    Full Test       | https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/7700817
    
    YABS completed in 14 min 6 sec
    

    have you tried to shutdown your VM completely and boot only a moment afterwards? maybe balancing then will put you to another node... not sure though how that is triggered. usually proxmox cluster can even easily online migrate without anyone noticing.

    Thanked by 1maverick
  • @radex said:

    @Cybr said:

    @radex said:

    Any proofs for this? It´s like the typical BS talk. I have a server from them and everything is perfect.

    I have no reason to BS anyone. I have over 50 servers with dozens of providers, some spanning over a decade, and only share negative experiences when I'm given serious reason to.

    I'm very patient with LET providers, and if they respond to tickets and make an effort to solve problems, I'll often wait months for them to provide a stable service.

    I've started using over 20 new LET providers this year, and may decide to do a round up of my experience with them at some point. Many had performance and/or stability issues due to faulty hardware, but almost all of them have solved the issues. We'll see if performance/stability holds up over time.

    To put things into perspective, even the lowest end shit-tier providers like Evos (who is now banned from LET) and HT-Hosting (who is infamous for being unstable) have provided better service and support than Fame.

    I get ticket replies on time, even migrated my server to new host with another cpu in middle of the night from friday to saturday. No Downtimes, yabs always high, 0 CPU Steal. I think it always depends how you write, when a customer is not polite i wouldnt reply to him too.

    Sounds like you've had infinitely better luck with them, but that doesn't mean everyone has had the same experience as you have.

    I'm always polite and professional in tickets with providers, don't use high priority tickets unless essential services are down, keep a cool head no matter how much a provider may test my patience, and am willing to wait over a week for a response.

    One of the providers I've used for many years is HostHatch, which you'll find complaints of all over LET due to their long ticket times, and yet I would never even think about complaining, because you can't expect fast support times at such a low price point.

    This is not my first rodeo with low end providers and my expectations are real low. Somehow they have still managed to let me down completely.

    I was planning on getting some servers from PH24, as a potential replacement, but I see they are already sold out.

  • ProHosting24ProHosting24 Member, Patron Provider

    We are atm pretty much overrun by in some cases very extended ticket support and many users asking for another genoa vm.

    Next time we will clearly exclude any support related to opearting systems or application configuration, at least if users only have such a deal VPS with us.

    If someone could summarize what questions that have been directed to us are still open, I would greatly appreciate that.

    Thanked by 2Frameworks Falzo
  • @ProHosting24 not avaible now

  • ProHosting24ProHosting24 Member, Patron Provider

    @hyperblast said:
    general observation: there has also been silence from @ProHosting24 for two days now. are they ducking away? ;)

    Hi please tag us with a quote of your previous question

    Thanked by 1hyperblast
  • I am really happy with this so far. It seems like one of the best VPS deals this year. I got two and also topped up credit with a 25% bonus, so I’m good for some year.

    YABS... I tend to use it very sparingly, but this is it. It looks like a keeper to me as long as things remain stable.

    # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
    #              Yet-Another-Bench-Script              #
    #                     v2024-06-09                    #
    # https://github.com/masonr/yet-another-bench-script #
    # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
    
    Tue Sep 10 03:59:53 PM CEST 2024
    
    Basic System Information:
    ---------------------------------
    Uptime     : 1 days, 19 hours, 10 minutes
    Processor  : AMD EPYC 9554 64-Core Processor
    CPU cores  : 4 @ 3099.996 MHz
    AES-NI     : ✔ Enabled
    VM-x/AMD-V : ✔ Enabled
    RAM        : 15.6 GiB
    Swap       : 0.0 KiB
    Disk       : 196.8 GiB
    Distro     : Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm)
    Kernel     : 6.1.0-25-amd64
    VM Type    : KVM
    IPv4/IPv6  : ✔ Online / ✔ Online
    
    IPv6 Network Information:
    ---------------------------------
    ISP        : Oliver Horscht is trading as \"SYNLINQ\"
    ASN        : AS44486 Oliver Horscht is trading as \"SYNLINQ\"
    Host       : Prohosting24
    Location   : Frankfurt am Main, Hesse (HE)
    Country    : Germany
    
    fio Disk Speed Tests (Mixed R/W 50/50) (Partition /dev/sda1):
    ---------------------------------
    Block Size | 4k            (IOPS) | 64k           (IOPS)
      ------   | ---            ----  | ----           ----
    Read       | 62.06 MB/s   (15.5k) | 849.91 MB/s  (13.2k)
    Write      | 62.16 MB/s   (15.5k) | 854.39 MB/s  (13.3k)
    Total      | 124.22 MB/s  (31.0k) | 1.70 GB/s    (26.6k)
               |                      |
    Block Size | 512k          (IOPS) | 1m            (IOPS)
      ------   | ---            ----  | ----           ----
    Read       | 2.66 GB/s     (5.2k) | 1.52 GB/s     (1.4k)
    Write      | 2.80 GB/s     (5.4k) | 1.62 GB/s     (1.5k)
    Total      | 5.47 GB/s    (10.6k) | 3.15 GB/s     (3.0k)
    
    iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv4):
    ---------------------------------
    Provider        | Location (Link)           | Send Speed      | Recv Speed      | Ping
    -----           | -----                     | ----            | ----            | ----
    Clouvider       | London, UK (10G)          | 1.95 Gbits/sec  | 1.93 Gbits/sec  | 13.8 ms
    Eranium         | Amsterdam, NL (100G)      | 2.04 Gbits/sec  | 1.96 Gbits/sec  | 7.15 ms
    Uztelecom       | Tashkent, UZ (10G)        | 18.9 Mbits/sec  | 1.82 Gbits/sec  | 114 ms
    Leaseweb        | Singapore, SG (10G)       | 342 Mbits/sec   | 18.7 Mbits/sec  | 161 ms
    Clouvider       | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | busy            | 1.11 Gbits/sec  | 143 ms
    Leaseweb        | NYC, NY, US (10G)         | 436 Mbits/sec   | 1.87 Gbits/sec  | 81.8 ms
    Edgoo           | Sao Paulo, BR (1G)        | 325 Mbits/sec   | 902 Mbits/sec   | 199 ms
    
    iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv6):
    ---------------------------------
    Provider        | Location (Link)           | Send Speed      | Recv Speed      | Ping
    -----           | -----                     | ----            | ----            | ----
    Clouvider       | London, UK (10G)          | 1.94 Gbits/sec  | 1.87 Gbits/sec  | 11.5 ms
    Eranium         | Amsterdam, NL (100G)      | 2.03 Gbits/sec  | 1.93 Gbits/sec  | 7.17 ms
    Uztelecom       | Tashkent, UZ (10G)        | 499 Mbits/sec   | 75.5 Mbits/sec  | 111 ms
    Leaseweb        | Singapore, SG (10G)       | busy            | busy            | 157 ms
    Clouvider       | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | busy            | 1.20 Gbits/sec  | 143 ms
    Leaseweb        | NYC, NY, US (10G)         | 608 Mbits/sec   | 1.84 Gbits/sec  | 81.9 ms
    Edgoo           | Sao Paulo, BR (1G)        | 297 Mbits/sec   | 460 Mbits/sec   | 196 ms
    
    Geekbench 6 Benchmark Test:
    ---------------------------------
    Test            | Value
                    |
    Single Core     | 1349
    Multi Core      | 3743
    
    Thanked by 3Falzo maverick nick_
  • FalzoFalzo Member
    edited September 2024

    @ProHosting24 said:

    @hyperblast said:
    general observation: there has also been silence from @ProHosting24 for two days now. are they ducking away? ;)

    Hi please tag us with a quote of your previous question

    He is unhappy that the geekbench result show decreased numbers on the now filled nodes compared to the initial ones when everything was quite empty ;-)

  • emghemgh Member, Megathread Squad

    @Falzo said:

    @ProHosting24 said:

    @hyperblast said:
    general observation: there has also been silence from @ProHosting24 for two days now. are they ducking away? ;)

    Hi please tag us with a quote of your previous question

    He is unhappy that the geekbench result show decreased numbers on the now filled nodes compared to the initial ones when everything was quite empty ;-)

    😆

    Thanked by 1hyperblast
  • @Falzo said:

    @ProHosting24 said:

    @hyperblast said:
    general observation: there has also been silence from @ProHosting24 for two days now. are they ducking away? ;)

    Hi please tag us with a quote of your previous question

    He is unhappy that the geekbench result show decreased numbers on the now filled nodes compared to the initial ones when everything was quite empty ;-)

    almost correct!
    do not expect values of 2000+ but more than 1100. 1500-1600+/- would be great.

    and i repeat myself: the deal of the year (so far), is already correct and above all stable compared to other specialists who have also offered deals here that were for the garbage.

  • @ProHosting24

    I am pretty happy with the vps performance considering the price.

    Thanked by 1Frameworks
  • is this announced clean-up already having an effect elsewhere @ProHosting24?
    https://lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/4015532/#Comment_4015532

  • OOS now.But i realy want it!

  • ProHosting24ProHosting24 Member, Patron Provider

    @hyperblast said:

    @Falzo said:

    @ProHosting24 said:

    @hyperblast said:
    general observation: there has also been silence from @ProHosting24 for two days now. are they ducking away? ;)

    Hi please tag us with a quote of your previous question

    He is unhappy that the geekbench result show decreased numbers on the now filled nodes compared to the initial ones when everything was quite empty ;-)

    almost correct!
    do not expect values of 2000+ but more than 1100. 1500-1600+/- would be great.

    and i repeat myself: the deal of the year (so far), is already correct and above all stable compared to other specialists who have also offered deals here that were for the garbage.

    Someone explained it already pretty good, we made the mistake of creating a benchmark when there has been only one vm and no other workload running on such a 9554 node.

    It will not be possible to reach those results again without keeping host utilization somewhere around 15-20%

    I am starting to get tired by such inquiries, i am even starting to question why we do those offerings at all considering how bad our work is valued by single individuals and the amount of work that is being generated.

    We work very efficiently with a high level of automation, but given our growth and the amount of vms sold compared to the last time we had such an offer, we will no longer be able to handle this amount of time-consuming inquiries, even if we further improve our control panel.

    Therefore if we are going to post here again, we will consider the following:

    • do not post yabs
    • do not offer refunds
    • do not offer priority or any kind of operating system and application support
    • do not offer host migrations, regardless of source or destination host and current offer
    • do not answer all lowendtalk questions
    • block users repeating the same questions (didn't research if that's possible)
  • WhiteRoseGWhiteRoseG Member
    edited September 2024

    @ProHosting24 said:

    @hyperblast said:

    @Falzo said:

    @ProHosting24 said:

    @hyperblast said:
    general observation: there has also been silence from @ProHosting24 for two days now. are they ducking away? ;)

    Hi please tag us with a quote of your previous question

    He is unhappy that the geekbench result show decreased numbers on the now filled nodes compared to the initial ones when everything was quite empty ;-)

    almost correct!
    do not expect values of 2000+ but more than 1100. 1500-1600+/- would be great.

    and i repeat myself: the deal of the year (so far), is already correct and above all stable compared to other specialists who have also offered deals here that were for the garbage.

    Someone explained it already pretty good, we made the mistake of creating a benchmark when there has been only one vm and no other workload running on such a 9554 node.

    It will not be possible to reach those results again without keeping host utilization somewhere around 15-20%

    I am starting to get tired by such inquiries, i am even starting to question why we do those offerings at all considering how bad our work is valued by single individuals and the amount of work that is being generated.

    We work very efficiently with a high level of automation, but given our growth and the amount of vms sold compared to the last time we had such an offer, we will no longer be able to handle this amount of time-consuming inquiries, even if we further improve our control panel.

    Therefore if we are going to post here again, we will consider the following:

    • do not post yabs
    • do not offer refunds
    • do not offer priority or any kind of operating system and application support
    • do not offer host migrations, regardless of source or destination host and current offer
    • do not answer all lowendtalk questions
    • block users repeating the same questions (didn't research if that's possible)

    I think you can stop advertising then :p, you could have know this would happen :p. Als you are a company operating in the EU I think by law you have to provide refunds.

    Thanked by 3cotc hyperblast TODO
  • @ProHosting24 said:

    Therefore if we are going to post here again, we will consider the following:

    • do not post yabs
    • do not offer refunds
    • do not offer priority or any kind of operating system and application support
    • do not offer host migrations, regardless of source or destination host and current offer
    • do not answer all LowEndTalk questions
    • block users repeating the same questions (didn't research if that's possible)

    May be include a FAQ for common questions along with the offer

    • Unmanaged VPS (i.e. no support beyond standard offline, template not working etc)
    • Make it clear no refunds at all
    • Reduced level of support for promo offers
    • Put a cost for VPS migration (say $10) to a different node

    There are many premium LET providers who put these conditions for the offers

  • @radex said:

    @hyperblast said:

    @Cybr said:

    @radex said:

    [...]

    To put things into perspective, even the lowest end shit-tier providers like Evos (who is now banned from LET) and HT-Hosting (who is infamous for being unstable) have provided better service and support than Fame.

    oioioi. and both are hard to beat.

    Fresh one, its so bad :D

    # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
    #              Yet-Another-Bench-Script              #
    #                     v2024-06-09                    #
    # https://github.com/masonr/yet-another-bench-script #
    # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
    
    Di 10. Sep 14:35:21 CEST 2024
    
    Basic System Information:
    ---------------------------------
    Uptime     : 10 days, 8 hours, 14 minutes
    Processor  : AMD EPYC 7443 24-Core Processor
    CPU cores  : 12 @ 2849.998 MHz
    AES-NI     : ✔ Enabled
    VM-x/AMD-V : ✔ Enabled
    RAM        : 47.0 GiB
    Swap       : 1024.0 MiB
    Disk       : 391.6 GiB
    Distro     : Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm)
    Kernel     : 6.1.0-23-amd64
    VM Type    : KVM
    IPv4/IPv6  : ✔ Online / ✔ Online
    
    IPv6 Network Information:
    ---------------------------------
    ISP        : Oliver Horscht is trading as \"SYNLINQ\"
    ASN        : AS44486 Oliver Horscht is trading as \"SYNLINQ\"
    Host       : FameSystems GmbH \u0026 Co. KG
    Location   : Frankfurt am Main, Hesse (HE)
    Country    : Germany
    
    fio Disk Speed Tests (Mixed R/W 50/50) (Partition /dev/sda3):
    ---------------------------------
    Block Size | 4k            (IOPS) | 64k           (IOPS)
      ------   | ---            ----  | ----           ----
    Read       | 236.14 MB/s  (59.0k) | 3.18 GB/s    (49.7k)
    Write      | 236.77 MB/s  (59.1k) | 3.20 GB/s    (50.0k)
    Total      | 472.91 MB/s (118.2k) | 6.38 GB/s    (99.7k)
               |                      |
    Block Size | 512k          (IOPS) | 1m            (IOPS)
      ------   | ---            ----  | ----           ----
    Read       | 1.39 GB/s     (2.7k) | 5.42 GB/s     (5.2k)
    Write      | 1.46 GB/s     (2.8k) | 5.78 GB/s     (5.6k)
    Total      | 2.86 GB/s     (5.5k) | 11.21 GB/s   (10.9k)
    
    Geekbench 6 Benchmark Test:
    ---------------------------------
    Test            | Value
                    |
    Single Core     | 1858
    Multi Core      | 12073
    Full Test       | https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/7702881
    
    YABS completed in 5 min 33 sec
    

    what is the bandwidth limit given?

  • @yakoudev said:

    @radex said:

    @hyperblast said:

    @Cybr said:

    @radex said:

    [...]

    To put things into perspective, even the lowest end shit-tier providers like Evos (who is now banned from LET) and HT-Hosting (who is infamous for being unstable) have provided better service and support than Fame.

    oioioi. and both are hard to beat.

    Fresh one, its so bad :D

    # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
    #              Yet-Another-Bench-Script              #
    #                     v2024-06-09                    #
    # https://github.com/masonr/yet-another-bench-script #
    # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
    
    Di 10. Sep 14:35:21 CEST 2024
    
    Basic System Information:
    ---------------------------------
    Uptime     : 10 days, 8 hours, 14 minutes
    Processor  : AMD EPYC 7443 24-Core Processor
    CPU cores  : 12 @ 2849.998 MHz
    AES-NI     : ✔ Enabled
    VM-x/AMD-V : ✔ Enabled
    RAM        : 47.0 GiB
    Swap       : 1024.0 MiB
    Disk       : 391.6 GiB
    Distro     : Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm)
    Kernel     : 6.1.0-23-amd64
    VM Type    : KVM
    IPv4/IPv6  : ✔ Online / ✔ Online
    
    IPv6 Network Information:
    ---------------------------------
    ISP        : Oliver Horscht is trading as \"SYNLINQ\"
    ASN        : AS44486 Oliver Horscht is trading as \"SYNLINQ\"
    Host       : FameSystems GmbH \u0026 Co. KG
    Location   : Frankfurt am Main, Hesse (HE)
    Country    : Germany
    
    fio Disk Speed Tests (Mixed R/W 50/50) (Partition /dev/sda3):
    ---------------------------------
    Block Size | 4k            (IOPS) | 64k           (IOPS)
      ------   | ---            ----  | ----           ----
    Read       | 236.14 MB/s  (59.0k) | 3.18 GB/s    (49.7k)
    Write      | 236.77 MB/s  (59.1k) | 3.20 GB/s    (50.0k)
    Total      | 472.91 MB/s (118.2k) | 6.38 GB/s    (99.7k)
               |                      |
    Block Size | 512k          (IOPS) | 1m            (IOPS)
      ------   | ---            ----  | ----           ----
    Read       | 1.39 GB/s     (2.7k) | 5.42 GB/s     (5.2k)
    Write      | 1.46 GB/s     (2.8k) | 5.78 GB/s     (5.6k)
    Total      | 2.86 GB/s     (5.5k) | 11.21 GB/s   (10.9k)
    
    Geekbench 6 Benchmark Test:
    ---------------------------------
    Test            | Value
                    |
    Single Core     | 1858
    Multi Core      | 12073
    Full Test       | https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/7702881
    
    YABS completed in 5 min 33 sec
    

    what is the bandwidth limit given?

    Fair Use

  • ProHosting24ProHosting24 Member, Patron Provider

    @WhiteRoseG said:

    @ProHosting24 said:

    @hyperblast said:

    @Falzo said:

    @ProHosting24 said:

    @hyperblast said:
    general observation: there has also been silence from @ProHosting24 for two days now. are they ducking away? ;)

    Hi please tag us with a quote of your previous question

    He is unhappy that the geekbench result show decreased numbers on the now filled nodes compared to the initial ones when everything was quite empty ;-)

    almost correct!
    do not expect values of 2000+ but more than 1100. 1500-1600+/- would be great.

    and i repeat myself: the deal of the year (so far), is already correct and above all stable compared to other specialists who have also offered deals here that were for the garbage.

    Someone explained it already pretty good, we made the mistake of creating a benchmark when there has been only one vm and no other workload running on such a 9554 node.

    It will not be possible to reach those results again without keeping host utilization somewhere around 15-20%

    I am starting to get tired by such inquiries, i am even starting to question why we do those offerings at all considering how bad our work is valued by single individuals and the amount of work that is being generated.

    We work very efficiently with a high level of automation, but given our growth and the amount of vms sold compared to the last time we had such an offer, we will no longer be able to handle this amount of time-consuming inquiries, even if we further improve our control panel.

    Therefore if we are going to post here again, we will consider the following:

    • do not post yabs
    • do not offer refunds
    • do not offer priority or any kind of operating system and application support
    • do not offer host migrations, regardless of source or destination host and current offer
    • do not answer all lowendtalk questions
    • block users repeating the same questions (didn't research if that's possible)

    I think you can stop advertising then :p, you could have know this would happen :p. Als you are a company operating in the EU I think by law you have to provide refunds.

    No we are not obligated to provide refunds just by operating as a company in the EU:
    https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bgb/__312f.html

    The fact that you see customer and service-oriented attitudes from companies as a God-given right, regardless of your own behavior, is simply absolutely wrong.

    Those practices are still commonly utilized by extremely cheap poor quality providers;
    We have never made use of this for our regular customers and also don't plan to.

    But in the past we have excluded any lowendtalk user, that ordered from us and then got a refund fulfilled, from ever using our services again. As this has been abused especially by users from LET, we will no longer offer it for this user base and will only fulfill refunds as a gesture of goodwill. If we are going to do that then depends on how respectful such users treat us and what their individual circumstances look like.

    At least it got less probably because of us being strict about never doing business again with anyone who requested weird refunds on such kind of offers.

  • ProHosting24ProHosting24 Member, Patron Provider

    @dev_vps said:

    @ProHosting24 said:

    Therefore if we are going to post here again, we will consider the following:

    • do not post yabs
    • do not offer refunds
    • do not offer priority or any kind of operating system and application support
    • do not offer host migrations, regardless of source or destination host and current offer
    • do not answer all LowEndTalk questions
    • block users repeating the same questions (didn't research if that's possible)

    May be include a FAQ for common questions along with the offer

    • Unmanaged VPS (i.e. no support beyond standard offline, template not working etc)
    • Make it clear no refunds at all
    • Reduced level of support for promo offers
    • Put a cost for VPS migration (say $10) to a different node

    There are many premium LET providers who put these conditions for the offers

    Thanks for letting me know, i already assumed other providers would do something similar at this scale.

    Thanked by 3Frameworks dev_vps Kris
  • @ProHosting24 don't take it too much to your heart, this is just what LET is about.
    seems you had no proper warning, when entering here. Welcome anyway!

    on a personal note: if you want to grab a beer some time and rant a bit about lowend users, I live in the area :D

  • stock still there. I want to grab another VPS for my Discord channel giveaway? @ProHosting24

  • MumblyMumbly Member
    edited September 2024

    @Falzo said: @ProHosting24 don't take it too much to your heart, this is just what LET is about.
    seems you had no proper warning, when entering here. Welcome anyway!

    This! :)
    No one has seriously complained about your service. There may be some concerns about certain aspects from this and that client, which si normal, but most people here share just their observations, and the overall reception of your service is positive.

    People here also understand that you offer an unmanaged service. Infrastructure, etc., is your responsibility, but anything beyond that ... you are not obliged to offer support with clients' applications, and any extra assistance you provide is an act of kindness that shouldn’t be taken for granted or take too much of your time and energy.

  • ProHosting24ProHosting24 Member, Patron Provider

    @Falzo said:
    @ProHosting24 don't take it too much to your heart, this is just what LET is about.
    seems you had no proper warning, when entering here. Welcome anyway!

    on a personal note: if you want to grab a beer some time and rant a bit about lowend users, I live in the area :D

    I am happy to invite you.

    But i moved to frankfurt 2 years ago, you could come over anyway and we can get some drinks on my tap. We as well may take a look at our hosts colocated in the maincubes datacenter beforehand, if you are interested enough in that.

    Thanks for welcoming me, very appreciated :)

    Thanked by 3Falzo Frameworks emgh
  • ProHosting24ProHosting24 Member, Patron Provider

    @Khadeercasino said:
    stock still there. I want to grab another VPS for my Discord channel giveaway? @ProHosting24

    @Khadeercasino said:
    stock still there. I want to grab another VPS for my Discord channel giveaway? @ProHosting24

    We could provide you one machine yea, please charge your account accordingly and just send me via messages your 5 digits support pin retrieved from our dashboard along with the information which of those packages you‘d like to have.

  • ProHosting24ProHosting24 Member, Patron Provider

    @Mumbly said:

    @Falzo said: @ProHosting24 don't take it too much to your heart, this is just what LET is about.
    seems you had no proper warning, when entering here. Welcome anyway!

    This! :)
    No one has seriously complained about your service. There may be some concerns about certain aspects from this and that client, which si normal, but most people here share just their observations, and the overall reception of your service is positive.

    People here also understand that you offer an unmanaged service. Infrastructure, etc., is your responsibility, but anything beyond that ... you are not obliged to offer support with clients' applications, and any extra assistance you provide is an act of kindness that shouldn’t be taken for granted or take too much of your time and energy.

    Yes i believe we just didn‘t clarify that strong enough in the first place.

    I need to add that i didn‘t feel attacked, but rather thought of it being incomprehensible that we need to lower the bars that much. But on the other hand we sold almost a thousand VMs, maybe its just a perception kind of thing.

    Thanked by 1Falzo
  • @ProHosting24 said:

    @Mumbly said:

    @Falzo said: @ProHosting24 don't take it too much to your heart, this is just what LET is about.
    seems you had no proper warning, when entering here. Welcome anyway!

    This! :)
    No one has seriously complained about your service. There may be some concerns about certain aspects from this and that client, which si normal, but most people here share just their observations, and the overall reception of your service is positive.

    People here also understand that you offer an unmanaged service. Infrastructure, etc., is your responsibility, but anything beyond that ... you are not obliged to offer support with clients' applications, and any extra assistance you provide is an act of kindness that shouldn’t be taken for granted or take too much of your time and energy.

    Yes i believe we just didn‘t clarify that strong enough in the first place.

    I need to add that i didn‘t feel attacked, but rather thought of it being incomprehensible that we need to lower the bars that much. But on the other hand we sold almost a thousand VMs, maybe its just a perception kind of thing.

    People just look for drama don't bother. Should already be obvious that it's unmanaged. And yabs results should be common sense as well. I myself only bother if the actual performance of my vps. I am on a genoa node hosting production stuff. And if the actual performance/uptime of my services are affected only then will you hear from me :P

  • ProHosting24ProHosting24 Member, Patron Provider

    @Silvest said:

    @ProHosting24 said:

    @Mumbly said:

    @Falzo said: @ProHosting24 don't take it too much to your heart, this is just what LET is about.
    seems you had no proper warning, when entering here. Welcome anyway!

    This! :)
    No one has seriously complained about your service. There may be some concerns about certain aspects from this and that client, which si normal, but most people here share just their observations, and the overall reception of your service is positive.

    People here also understand that you offer an unmanaged service. Infrastructure, etc., is your responsibility, but anything beyond that ... you are not obliged to offer support with clients' applications, and any extra assistance you provide is an act of kindness that shouldn’t be taken for granted or take too much of your time and energy.

    Yes i believe we just didn‘t clarify that strong enough in the first place.

    I need to add that i didn‘t feel attacked, but rather thought of it being incomprehensible that we need to lower the bars that much. But on the other hand we sold almost a thousand VMs, maybe its just a perception kind of thing.

    People just look for drama don't bother. Should already be obvious that it's unmanaged. And yabs results should be common sense as well. I myself only bother if the actual performance of my vps. I am on a genoa node hosting production stuff. And if the actual performance/uptime of my services are affected only then will you hear from me :P

    That way, it's fun for everyone. Thanks <3

  • @ProHosting24 said:

    @Mumbly said:

    @Falzo said: @ProHosting24 don't take it too much to your heart, this is just what LET is about.
    seems you had no proper warning, when entering here. Welcome anyway!

    This! :)
    No one has seriously complained about your service. There may be some concerns about certain aspects from this and that client, which si normal, but most people here share just their observations, and the overall reception of your service is positive.

    People here also understand that you offer an unmanaged service. Infrastructure, etc., is your responsibility, but anything beyond that ... you are not obliged to offer support with clients' applications, and any extra assistance you provide is an act of kindness that shouldn’t be taken for granted or take too much of your time and energy.

    Yes i believe we just didn‘t clarify that strong enough in the first place.

    I need to add that i didn‘t feel attacked, but rather thought of it being incomprehensible that we need to lower the bars that much. But on the other hand we sold almost a thousand VMs, maybe its just a perception kind of thing.

    Yes, I was just sharing my observations. Sorry if my comments came across as criticism. This is a very generous offer, and your work on improving the performance is amazing.

Sign In or Register to comment.