VPS vs Dedicated Server - Performance and Price Revealed - Chris Titus Tech
video description
Date: 2022-03-21
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
Heath
-Chris Titus Tech -- Dedicated is great. VPS is affordable and convenient.
There's another option between the two: CoLo servers. -Cheaper- than Dedicated where you're essentially Leasing a server, you install your own server into a rack in the DC. Mac Minis were popular for a hot minute because of the TDP and density for the DCs . . . You had to do some work-arounds to get the IPMI-like access sometimes. It's been a while, but it's mostly irrelevant with the more powerful and affordable options of rackmount equipment available these days.
VPS has also become a bastardized term that now incorporates what used to be called -Shared Webhosting-. If you don't have -root- and the ability to restart your -Instance-, then you don't have a Virtual Private Server -- in -my- definition -- What you have is a lower-tiered version called -Shared Webhosting- which, 10+ years ago, meant you'd be on a server -hand-me-down- after a dedicated or VPS box was replaced with an upgraded system, and instead of there being a few dozen to a few hundred VPS Instances on it, you'd be on the older hardware with a few thousand Shared Instances with much lower specs available. With DreamHost, HostGator, DigitalOcean, or my favorite, Vultr, they've made your choice of using -Shared Webhosting- one of a lack of information. The pricing is affordable, and the resources are well-managed. The downside is that you can very-much shoot yourself in the foot if you're careless. The up-side of Shared Hosting is that you can't affect the OS. You don't have actual root, only a chrooted access that lets you restart your apache process, if you even have that much access. The company manages the upgrades and schedules downtime to replace failing hardware or to apply the security patches, and the custom patches that they may need for the scale they're running their servers at. You only have to worry about your website's code, though you have to work with the server as presented to you. Some companies will install modules if you need, others won't. That said, it's been about 10 years since I've worked in webhosting, and my last project was converting my customer from the older Shared format to a hybrid format that was between Shared and what DreamHost/HostGator/DigitalOcean/Vultr operate with as VPS. It was by no means a VPS product, but the customer had more control over their instance than before.
Anyway, my coffee is defective. Sorry for the long ramble. Just meant to remind you about Colo as an in-between option that many DataCenters offer for considerably less than Dedicated Hosting, and considerably more than VPS.
reply
-Chris Titus Tech -- Dedicated is great. VPS is affordable and convenient.
There's another option between the two: CoLo servers. -Cheaper- than Dedicated where you're essentially Leasing a server, you install your own server into a rack in the DC. Mac Minis were popular for a hot minute because of the TDP and density for the DCs . . . You had to do some work-arounds to get the IPMI-like access sometimes. It's been a while, but it's mostly irrelevant with the more powerful and affordable options of rackmount equipment available these days.
VPS has also become a bastardized term that now incorporates what used to be called -Shared Webhosting-. If you don't have -root- and the ability to restart your -Instance-, then you don't have a Virtual Private Server -- in -my- definition -- What you have is a lower-tiered version called -Shared Webhosting- which, 10+ years ago, meant you'd be on a server -hand-me-down- after a dedicated or VPS box was replaced with an upgraded system, and instead of there being a few dozen to a few hundred VPS Instances on it, you'd be on the older hardware with a few thousand Shared Instances with much lower specs available. With DreamHost, HostGator, DigitalOcean, or my favorite, Vultr, they've made your choice of using -Shared Webhosting- one of a lack of information. The pricing is affordable, and the resources are well-managed. The downside is that you can very-much shoot yourself in the foot if you're careless. The up-side of Shared Hosting is that you can't affect the OS. You don't have actual root, only a chrooted access that lets you restart your apache process, if you even have that much access. The company manages the upgrades and schedules downtime to replace failing hardware or to apply the security patches, and the custom patches that they may need for the scale they're running their servers at. You only have to worry about your website's code, though you have to work with the server as presented to you. Some companies will install modules if you need, others won't. That said, it's been about 10 years since I've worked in webhosting, and my last project was converting my customer from the older Shared format to a hybrid format that was between Shared and what DreamHost/HostGator/DigitalOcean/Vultr operate with as VPS. It was by no means a VPS product, but the customer had more control over their instance than before.
Anyway, my coffee is defective. Sorry for the long ramble. Just meant to remind you about Colo as an in-between option that many DataCenters offer for considerably less than Dedicated Hosting, and considerably more than VPS.
reply
yvrelna
The advantage of VPS with regards to downtime isn't really related to the uptime agreed in SLA, but rather because of the cheaper cost and more flexible instance sizes, you can afford to rent larger number of smaller VPSes and configure them in high availability setup (e.g. automatic fail over, continuous database replication, cluster storage system, multiple availability zone). Most high availability cluster systems will require that you have an odd number of masters, which means that you'll need to rent at least three machines to have proper HA system. If you absolutely need HA system, but your data throughput is actually fairly modest, VPS is going to be signficantly more cost effective than running dedicated servers.
The smaller instances also means that it's easier to gradually add capacity than with dedicated servers, as you don't have to pay for unused capacity because the smallest dedicated server that your provider has is a 128-core beast.
If you have a high availability setup, the SLA of individual instances becomes much less important. Though you'll need to make sure that your VPS provider allows you to configure anti affinity to ensure that your multiple VPSes are actually going to run on separate hardware.
reply
The advantage of VPS with regards to downtime isn't really related to the uptime agreed in SLA, but rather because of the cheaper cost and more flexible instance sizes, you can afford to rent larger number of smaller VPSes and configure them in high availability setup (e.g. automatic fail over, continuous database replication, cluster storage system, multiple availability zone). Most high availability cluster systems will require that you have an odd number of masters, which means that you'll need to rent at least three machines to have proper HA system. If you absolutely need HA system, but your data throughput is actually fairly modest, VPS is going to be signficantly more cost effective than running dedicated servers.
The smaller instances also means that it's easier to gradually add capacity than with dedicated servers, as you don't have to pay for unused capacity because the smallest dedicated server that your provider has is a 128-core beast.
If you have a high availability setup, the SLA of individual instances becomes much less important. Though you'll need to make sure that your VPS provider allows you to configure anti affinity to ensure that your multiple VPSes are actually going to run on separate hardware.
reply
Dison
We have a ton of plugins running on our Wordpress site (shared hosting $8/m [new registration price then $25/m after]), say 20 of them and a huge Astra theme with tons of add-on that we are currently using, say 10 of these addons are actively running, and Elementor page builder with tons of addons as well that we are currently using. Some of our plugins are basically fetching reviews from external servers and plug them into our frontend and almost all pages have these js plugins for our chatbot and form submissions and I can fairly say we're running 2-5(1.5 sec first contentful paint) seconds page load with no throttle. It doesn't have many images, 800 visits per day, but sometimes, it runs slow during peak hours up to 5+ seconds for a 2MB page(2 sec first contentful paint) even if we install cache tools like WP Rocket / Total Cache. If we transfer to dedicated server worth 100 bucks, are we getting less than a sec speed?
reply
We have a ton of plugins running on our Wordpress site (shared hosting $8/m [new registration price then $25/m after]), say 20 of them and a huge Astra theme with tons of add-on that we are currently using, say 10 of these addons are actively running, and Elementor page builder with tons of addons as well that we are currently using. Some of our plugins are basically fetching reviews from external servers and plug them into our frontend and almost all pages have these js plugins for our chatbot and form submissions and I can fairly say we're running 2-5(1.5 sec first contentful paint) seconds page load with no throttle. It doesn't have many images, 800 visits per day, but sometimes, it runs slow during peak hours up to 5+ seconds for a 2MB page(2 sec first contentful paint) even if we install cache tools like WP Rocket / Total Cache. If we transfer to dedicated server worth 100 bucks, are we getting less than a sec speed?
reply
Ian
Chris who is your VPS provider, I am looking to switch my VPS provider and I would love to know who you use because Vultr is down more than it's up and I need to have a reliable VPS. Just like you I can't afford to use a dedicated server. The big reason I ask who your VPS provider is because you said they could co-locate your server, this is huge for me and the other question I have is latency if you did a ping to your server what would your ping be. Right now I have 35 ms as my normal ping with my VPS through Vultr which is a huge reason as to why I remain with them even though they are down frequently because when they are up they work wonderful.
reply
Chris who is your VPS provider, I am looking to switch my VPS provider and I would love to know who you use because Vultr is down more than it's up and I need to have a reliable VPS. Just like you I can't afford to use a dedicated server. The big reason I ask who your VPS provider is because you said they could co-locate your server, this is huge for me and the other question I have is latency if you did a ping to your server what would your ping be. Right now I have 35 ms as my normal ping with my VPS through Vultr which is a huge reason as to why I remain with them even though they are down frequently because when they are up they work wonderful.
reply
Texas
you chose a hella expensive dedicated provider... i have dual xeon octocore dedicated boxes.. 32gb ram.. 2x1tb ssd in hardware raid1... 1Gb real dedicated un-shared node.. /29 ipv4 included plus i add a /27 block of ipv4 on them.... 20Tb bandwidth... and i run ESXi on them... i pay $105/mo each.. granted, they aren't the newest.. and your example has a pipe that charlie sheen would be envious of... but for most sites... thats way overkill... mine only host a handful of sites each... each client gets dedicated resources ... and they never come close to saturation.. shop around... deals to be had.. dont bend over for the crooks
reply
you chose a hella expensive dedicated provider... i have dual xeon octocore dedicated boxes.. 32gb ram.. 2x1tb ssd in hardware raid1... 1Gb real dedicated un-shared node.. /29 ipv4 included plus i add a /27 block of ipv4 on them.... 20Tb bandwidth... and i run ESXi on them... i pay $105/mo each.. granted, they aren't the newest.. and your example has a pipe that charlie sheen would be envious of... but for most sites... thats way overkill... mine only host a handful of sites each... each client gets dedicated resources ... and they never come close to saturation.. shop around... deals to be had.. dont bend over for the crooks
reply
StringerNews1
Nothing like having your own iron in a rack somewhere. I belonged to a couple of non-profit colocation projects about 20 years ago that sought to provide free colocation space for 501(c)3 charitable organizations and private individuals, supported by the donations of people who either supported charities or could afford to kick in a bit more than the minimum cost to colocate a machine. At -$50 per RU it was dirt cheap for access to facilities like Hurricane Electric, with what was then a screaming Gigabit backbone connection. Too bad it was mismanaged and fell apart.
reply
Nothing like having your own iron in a rack somewhere. I belonged to a couple of non-profit colocation projects about 20 years ago that sought to provide free colocation space for 501(c)3 charitable organizations and private individuals, supported by the donations of people who either supported charities or could afford to kick in a bit more than the minimum cost to colocate a machine. At -$50 per RU it was dirt cheap for access to facilities like Hurricane Electric, with what was then a screaming Gigabit backbone connection. Too bad it was mismanaged and fell apart.
reply
PC
What would be the best option to relocate a call center that is currently located overseas working with a client where every single agent computer need to be shown as US based station. My main concern, would it be possible for me to have a server a dedicated server and have all of them connect to it or is there another options so my overseas agents to work in the virtual computer in the US where they going to be receiving and making calls and installing software and so on?
reply
What would be the best option to relocate a call center that is currently located overseas working with a client where every single agent computer need to be shown as US based station. My main concern, would it be possible for me to have a server a dedicated server and have all of them connect to it or is there another options so my overseas agents to work in the virtual computer in the US where they going to be receiving and making calls and installing software and so on?
reply
Ben
Thanks. Very informative.
One thing I would add is that if you have a virtual server hosting your website, your website-associated email server may be shared with others. That means that if there are a bunch of spammers on your virtual server, your outgoing emails will not get through to your contacts. With a dedicated server, your email reputation is your own.
reply
Thanks. Very informative.
One thing I would add is that if you have a virtual server hosting your website, your website-associated email server may be shared with others. That means that if there are a bunch of spammers on your virtual server, your outgoing emails will not get through to your contacts. With a dedicated server, your email reputation is your own.
reply
Chris
I need to note based on several comments. The cost isn't for the hardware... It is for the dedicated 10 gbs connection. If you chop this down to a 1 gbs connection the price drops from around 2000 to 600. Also, this is for big business and not your average server. You need to have a specific need for that kind of throughput. Most don't need that kind of power.
reply
I need to note based on several comments. The cost isn't for the hardware... It is for the dedicated 10 gbs connection. If you chop this down to a 1 gbs connection the price drops from around 2000 to 600. Also, this is for big business and not your average server. You need to have a specific need for that kind of throughput. Most don't need that kind of power.
reply
Fredrik
There is a huge difference between cheap shared resources and dedicated resources cloud servers. On google cloud platform you can create virtual machines with almost 4TB of ram and 160 vCPUs. I'm sure there are use cases for rented dedicated machines but you can do so much more with AWS/GCP/Azure like automatic scaling of resources based on traffic/load.
reply
There is a huge difference between cheap shared resources and dedicated resources cloud servers. On google cloud platform you can create virtual machines with almost 4TB of ram and 160 vCPUs. I'm sure there are use cases for rented dedicated machines but you can do so much more with AWS/GCP/Azure like automatic scaling of resources based on traffic/load.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
