LowEndBox - Cheap VPS, Hosting and Dedicated Server Deals

ChicagoVPS - $7 2GB OpenVZ VPS in Chicago

ChicagoVPS When Chris from ChicagoVPS sent me this offer — “first time ever” — he is trying to emphasis on the significance of price break through, for ChicagoVPS at least. However it is not the first time a VPS with 2GB memory was offered at low end box price. Last time 2GB VPS was offered, the said provider ended up being very close to the dead pool just 2 months down the track. ChicagoVPS would fare better I am sure, judging from their track records, but indeed it is somewhere I consider a dangerous territory at the brink of super-over-selling. Anyway. Here are the deals:

  • EnterpriseSign up link
  • 2048MB memory
  • 50GB storage
  • 2000GB/month data transfer
  • OpenVZ/SolusVM
  • $7/month with coupon code 2048
  • ProfessionalSign up link
  • 1024MB memory
  • 30GB storage
  • 1500GB/month data transfer
  • OpenVZ/SolusVM
  • $5.50/month with coupon code 1024

Servers in Chicago IL with ColoCrossing. How does it work I wonder, but I guess it all got to do with human psychology. Would you pay just $1.50/month more (27% more) to get double the memory at Two-Gigabytes?! Sure, why not?! Despite that bootstrapping from a low-end-script to run a dozen or so PHP sites would probably use 200MB RAM max. But I guess “PHP sites” are far from the only applications for VPS, 2GB memory would find its applications when you load up monsters such as Minecraft and other bloated software requiring JavaVM…

Anyway. Great offer for those who need it. Chris/Jeremiah have also been providing good support at ChicagoVPS.

Update: Some FAQs in the comments:

Latest posts by LEA (see all)


  1. Aaaah, crazy offer! Probably thanks to the recent drop of ram price? Or simply massive overselling? I’m sure quite a few will not have their monster 2gb box fully filled.

    September 1, 2011 @ 11:34 am
  2. I would love to try this but I’m not too sure how fast it will be…
    Anyone willing to let me benchmark/write a review?

    September 1, 2011 @ 11:40 am
    • I/O:

      root@s6:~# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
      16384+0 records in
      16384+0 records out
      1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 17.3842 s, 61.8 MB/s


      root@s6:~# wget -O /dev/null http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
      --2011-09-02 06:52:53--  http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
      Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net...
      Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net||:80... connected.
      HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
      Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream]
      Saving to: “/dev/null”
      100%[=======================================================================================================================>] 104,857,600 10.6M/s   in 9.2s    
      2011-09-02 06:53:02 (10.8 MB/s) - “/dev/null” saved [104857600/104857600]
      September 2, 2011 @ 10:57 am
      • Hi,

        This I/O looks a little low =( at least HDD wise. Back to the fixing and drawing boards here to boost this up.



        September 2, 2011 @ 1:28 pm
        • if you find such an IO slow then I would go chicagoVPS, :)
          Please let me know the #cpucores for 2048mb plan.

          September 2, 2011 @ 6:39 pm
        • Thanks for looking into the I/O. :)

          @tinyray: This x4

          root@s6:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo 
          processor       : 0
          vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
          cpu family      : 6
          model           : 44
          model name      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           E5620  @ 2.40GHz
          stepping        : 2
          cpu MHz         : 2400.147
          cache size      : 12288 KB
          physical id     : 0
          siblings        : 8
          core id         : 0
          cpu cores       : 4
          apicid          : 0
          fpu             : yes
          fpu_exception   : yes
          cpuid level     : 11
          wp              : yes
          flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc ida nonstop_tsc arat pni monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt lahf_lm                                              
          bogomips        :4800.29                                            
          clflush size    : 64                                                                       
          cache_alignment : 64                                            
          address sizes   : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual 
          power management: [8]
          September 2, 2011 @ 10:24 pm
      • Dave:

        You should really test the outgoing bandwidth as well as or instead of the incoming (though that relies on you having a fast link elsewhere to test it with), as most hosts incoming bandwidth is significantly less close to saturated than the outgoing. One VPS I have can pull 10Mbyte/sec inwards every time, but it is rare I see rates much over 1Mbyte/sec outwards.

        September 2, 2011 @ 5:47 pm
        • Kuro:

          From my $15/year BuyVM VPS in San Jose:

          # wget http://96.8.120.*/100mb.test -O /dev/null
          --2011-09-03 00:02:15--  http://96.8.120.*/100mb.test
          Connecting to 96.8.120.*:80... connected.
          HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
          Length: 104857600 (100M) [text/plain]
          Saving to: `/dev/null'
          100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 11.2M/s   in 12s
          2011-09-03 00:02:26 (8.50 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
          September 2, 2011 @ 8:05 pm
        • Dave:

          @Kuro: Thanks. Looks impressive.

          September 2, 2011 @ 11:28 pm
  3. Hello all,

    No reason to be skeptical here, we deployed a new node that is ready to take on the orders, it is completely empty so it would be hard to get a real benchmark; however I can say that we are not going to be super overselling and for sure not going out of business.



    September 1, 2011 @ 11:56 am
    • Didn’t you scare a few of your clients off when you were half dead?

      September 1, 2011 @ 12:35 pm
      • @Daniel — not too sure what you are saying here, as ChicagoVPS has never been in the state of “half dead”. Did you mean that a 2GB offer at this price would scare potential clients off when another provider (ipap.co in this case) is half dead?

        September 1, 2011 @ 1:31 pm
        • I’m refering to the point where they were listed as Half-dead in a Dead Pool, or was it at LeT they were listed as dead by a customer, or am I totally confusing ChicagoVPS for another company?

          September 1, 2011 @ 1:41 pm
        • Yeh, I’ve been confusing ChicagoVPS and NordicVPS together for a long time it appears, so better just to ignore my comment.

          September 1, 2011 @ 1:47 pm
  4. I don’t care how much RAM may have dropped, these prices are ridiculous for that amount of RAM. Lets see if there still here for next months offer.

    September 1, 2011 @ 12:50 pm
    • We have been around for quite some time, and pretty sure were going no where :)

      September 1, 2011 @ 1:22 pm
      • How many cpu cores for the Enterprise plan?

        September 1, 2011 @ 3:23 pm
      • rm:

        “Going nowhere” sounds pessimistic, how about “not going anywhere” instead :)

        More to the topic: what is the status regarding IPv6?
        IRC allowed?

        September 1, 2011 @ 7:02 pm
    • I don’t think its ridiculous, its just a bargain deal :)

      September 5, 2011 @ 1:37 am
    • Hey,

      Were still here :)

      October 19, 2011 @ 4:38 pm
  5. Pinoy:

    THe link http://www.chicagovps.com/ is not working

    September 1, 2011 @ 1:09 pm
    • tommy:

      yeah, the link seem down from here too.

      September 1, 2011 @ 1:13 pm
    • Same here…

      September 1, 2011 @ 1:18 pm
    • Sorry my mistake. It should have been ChicagoVPS.net.

      September 1, 2011 @ 1:28 pm
      • tommy:

        I see, thanks.

        September 1, 2011 @ 1:29 pm
  6. That’s because it’s chicagovps.net not .com

    @Daniel since when were we ever half dead, stop bringing bad publicity to us on every post you make.



    September 1, 2011 @ 1:20 pm
    • ab:

      just ignore him, he’s just here to spam his namelink

      September 1, 2011 @ 1:22 pm
      • Really? Proove that I spam every post.

        September 1, 2011 @ 1:42 pm
        • The above post bring nothing useful to the thread. Looks like spam to me.

          September 1, 2011 @ 5:17 pm
      • And yet when Lowendstock spams their link, it acceptable to you guys.


        September 1, 2011 @ 9:56 pm
        • a:

          A lot of providers put their link in this blog. As well as others who are not even related to hosting. Why single out lowendstock? at least it is related and for some people they are doing a service to our community

          September 2, 2011 @ 1:01 pm
        • But yet when you think Daniel is spaming his link instead of making an honest comment, you raise it as an issue.

          Daniel helps out a lot more here on this blog than Lowendstock does. LES is just here to spam his link.

          I’ve asked this before. Please point at a single comment that LES that has had any value what so ever.

          September 2, 2011 @ 1:59 pm
        • ab:

          Maybe to others, but I hate lowendstock with a passion and their useless pile of crpa.

          September 2, 2011 @ 2:16 pm
        • Spirit:

          What about to stop with this irrelevant offtopic crap in ChicagoVPS offer? And continue at some other place, LET as example.. if there’s a need already.
          (not targeted anyone individually but some you people don’t know to end with this while most of us don’t care)

          Thank you;

          September 2, 2011 @ 4:17 pm
        • Well said Spirit, well said. You are a great man :)

          September 2, 2011 @ 5:22 pm
        • @drmike Thanks for the kind words, but the comments accusing me of spamming don’t bother me,

          There’s at least 2 other providers that have commented here with their name linking to their website, maybe more, but I didn’t think it was worth wasting my time to check every comment.

          As said above, I made a mistake of confusing some of NordicVPS /issues/ with ChicagoVPS, that is my fault, and shouldn’t posted my comment without verifying first. But at least I have admitted to my mistakes.

          I hope this concludes this some sort of an argument, an end to it was long overdue.

          September 2, 2011 @ 8:46 pm
    • ab:

      like he does on every bloody post

      September 1, 2011 @ 1:23 pm
    • Sorry about that, LEA posted the wrong link :|

      September 1, 2011 @ 1:23 pm
    • You’re probably confusing me with Daniel Meah (FirstNetServ), I don’t remember posting negative comments on every one of your offers

      September 1, 2011 @ 1:50 pm
      • Daniel:

        Certainly not me. I have nothing against ChicagoVPS.

        September 1, 2011 @ 2:01 pm
  7. draggy:

    I keep hoping you’ll do some xen offers. I love my xen box through chicagovps, but it could use some more ram ;)

    September 1, 2011 @ 1:48 pm
    • Draggy,

      That should be shortly. I dont even get a chance to post Xen anymore on here, just because i have so much back order for Xen that I sell it out pretty quick.



      September 1, 2011 @ 5:55 pm
      • Will you support Debian 6 for Xen boxes?

        September 13, 2011 @ 3:48 am
  8. Bogô:

    I just bought this VPS (2GB), it was really fast i just paid and my VPS is UP.
    How can i deeply test?
    I just leaved myresellerhost.info because they just lost my VM without backup, then i asked to build it again and it’s taking more then one week. I hope this doesn’t happen on chigacovps.net.



    September 1, 2011 @ 1:51 pm
    • LOOOOL myoversellerhost n_n Spam, sorry

      September 1, 2011 @ 3:02 pm
  9. frantisheq:

    am i dreaming? lots of 2048’s for 5€ and it was up instantly

    September 1, 2011 @ 2:11 pm
    • frantisheq:

      just realized i got 40GB instead of 50GB!

      September 1, 2011 @ 2:25 pm
      • Bogô:

        Same here!!

        September 1, 2011 @ 2:39 pm
      • Bogô:

        Same here!! and no swap!

        September 1, 2011 @ 2:39 pm
        • Adam:

          There is no swap. WYSIWYG.

          September 1, 2011 @ 2:43 pm
      • I will make sure everyone gets the 10GB added on.



        September 1, 2011 @ 2:45 pm
        • frantisheq:

          fixed. thanks

          September 1, 2011 @ 3:05 pm
  10. Someone can share a geekbench? :P

    September 1, 2011 @ 3:03 pm
  11. out of stock or the promo code is expired,

    September 1, 2011 @ 3:15 pm
    • Works for me :)

      September 1, 2011 @ 3:26 pm
      • Did you check the professional plan, it still charges twice, “$143.04 USD Annually”

        September 1, 2011 @ 6:33 pm
  12. Corey:

    Still getting 40GB

    September 1, 2011 @ 3:51 pm
  13. What kind of CPU and how many cores (Enterprise)? I may just get one for personal development uses.

    September 1, 2011 @ 3:59 pm
    • Terii,

      One professional you should have access to two of our E5620 CPU’s Cores. We run both E5620’s on our build outs, so they are really fast :)



      September 1, 2011 @ 6:37 pm
      • Hi, Jeremiah Shinkle,
        What exactly the number of cpu cores the enterprise plan (2048MB) has?

        September 2, 2011 @ 6:30 pm
  14. dpflap:

    any chance for DA in forseeable future?

    September 1, 2011 @ 4:34 pm
    • Hi,

      No DA in the future that i see unless more people actually start asking us for it.



      September 1, 2011 @ 6:35 pm
  15. Josh:

    Do you have a test IP to check against?

    September 1, 2011 @ 5:15 pm
  16. innya:


    September 1, 2011 @ 5:16 pm
  17. innya:

    When is this offer expire?

    September 1, 2011 @ 5:59 pm
    • Hi,

      I am pretty sure Chris told me I have to run this until our next promo (even though I am not ready for this one).



      September 1, 2011 @ 6:36 pm
  18. rm:

    And again, TOS references AUP, but the actual AUP is nowhere to be found!!!
    WTF, can’t you get your stuff together before posting offers.

    “ChicagoVPS strictly enforces compliance with its Acceptable Use Policy which may be
    found on the ChicagoVPS Website located at http://www.chicagovps.net. The terms of the
    Acceptable Use Policy are incorporated into this agreement as though they were fully set
    forth at length herein. You agree to maintain your website in full compliance with the terms
    of the Acceptable Use Policy. Failure to so comply is cause for immediate suspension and
    termination under paragraph (8) herein. ChicagoVPS reserves the right to refuse to provide
    service to anyone at their sole option.”

    How can you people even buy this, TOS for it references a document “as though they were fully set
    forth at length herein”, which you haven’t actually seen or it may not even exist yet.

    September 1, 2011 @ 7:07 pm
    • RM,

      Please calm down, it is there http://chicagovps.net/downloads/

      We are a very professional company, and do everything we can to ensure everyone has a great hosting experience.



      September 1, 2011 @ 9:28 pm
      • Your Terms of Service is linked to at the bottom left of your site. Maybe also linking to the AUP would be a good idea as well?

        I’ve got screaming kids by me again tonight. Someone else is going to have to review those docs for anything interesting.

        September 1, 2011 @ 9:59 pm
        • rm:

          This is my point exactly, AUP is not linked from the website, and neither the download folder is linked.

          September 2, 2011 @ 4:00 am
        • Ill make sure to get that done just for you :D



          September 2, 2011 @ 4:34 am
        • rm:

          > Ill make sure to get that done just for you :D

          Don’t contradict yourself, either you are a “very professional company”, or you make fun of people requesting essential contractual documents when doing business with you.

          September 2, 2011 @ 5:19 am
        • Chris, thank you for making a legally required document available so that folks can access it like they should.

          May I suggest when folks point out issue with your site and/or service, they get dealt with? Not looking too professional here. You’re not another YardVPS who flat out lies to folks and pays no attention to people whyen they raise issues, are you? Kind of dropped down to that level right now.

          September 2, 2011 @ 11:20 am
        • @rm and drmike,

          I was being sincere so I don’t see why you think Im mocking either of you? I will have this done sometime today.

          Just because I put a smiley face after a comment does not mean I’m joking in any sense, I meant it and agree that it should be on the main page where people can access it.



          September 2, 2011 @ 11:47 am
  19. Scott:

    Good deal.

    Waiting for provision now :D

    September 1, 2011 @ 7:14 pm
    • Scott,

      I gotcha in line here working on getting everyone provisioned.



      September 1, 2011 @ 9:01 pm
  20. Wangsit:

    Why the price is huge different at the site? I try to visit, and seeing that Enterprise is $24.95/month, and NOT $7/month. Is the offer expired or something bad happen? Let me know.

    September 1, 2011 @ 7:39 pm
    • Eddie:

      Did you use the link provided in the OP? It will show $24.95 on the first page, but once you get past the first page, it should show the $7/mo price.

      September 1, 2011 @ 11:52 pm
      • Wangsit:

        Thank’s for the info. But, seems this promotion is only apply for monthly bill, since when I try to pick the advanced term of payment, the promotion code is useless. Any idea or maybe we need to manually email for 3 or 6 months payment bill? Chris? Jeremiah?

        September 2, 2011 @ 3:09 am
  21. Joseph:

    I’m currently a customer on the openvz professional plan, is it possible for me to upgrade to this plan?

    September 1, 2011 @ 8:16 pm
    • Joseph,

      We do not allow existing customers to migrate to the new special. Sorry =(


      September 1, 2011 @ 9:01 pm
    • dpflap:

      just order a new plan and terminate the other.

      September 2, 2011 @ 1:23 am
  22. Price is very cheap!

    September 1, 2011 @ 10:03 pm
  23. Very cheap deal for so many resources. It’ll be interesting to see if it’s sustainable!

    September 1, 2011 @ 10:17 pm
  24. Wow, this price is so good we just ordered one :)

    September 1, 2011 @ 10:44 pm
  25. Hello everyone!

    For anyone that has already ordered, our install process today is not instant. We are doing everything manually since so many orders were coming in simultaneously and causing issues.

    Thanks for your patience!



    September 2, 2011 @ 12:17 am
    • Wangsit:

      Hi Chris, is it possible to make advanced payment, like 3 or 6 months? Just wondering is it could be done. Meanwhile, I just ordering the Enterprise service. Thank you.

      September 2, 2011 @ 3:19 am
      • Hi,

        Please put in a ticket and we can worth with you on advance payment.



        September 2, 2011 @ 1:15 pm
  26. Hello,

    Everyone has been successfully installed after the flood of orders and installs are not back to instant.

    Thanks everyone for the support and patience!



    September 2, 2011 @ 4:33 am
  27. Kenny:

    Amazing prices! Just put my order in !

    September 2, 2011 @ 5:53 am
  28. Wesley:

    Going to order one right now

    September 2, 2011 @ 8:45 am
  29. Dave:

    How much of those RAM allocations are guaranteed and how much is “burstable up to”? The main website doesn’t say either.

    September 2, 2011 @ 9:32 am
    • Wesley:

      I got this

                   total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
      Mem:          2048        424       1623          0          0          0
      -/+ buffers/cache:        424       1623
      Swap:            0          0          0

      Yeah already using 424MB for Gameserver :D
      runs pretty stable

      September 2, 2011 @ 9:52 am
      • Dave:

        You usually see the maximum allocation in the output of the free command. I tend to judge OpenVZ VMs by the guarantee RAM. If yuo don’t use more than that amount you are (if I understand correctly) safe from your processes being killed by the OOM killer if the host runs low on RAM+swap (i.e. if everyone’s VMs suddenly start using a chunk more than their garanteed quota at the same time).

        September 2, 2011 @ 10:19 am
        • Dave:

          That isn’t to say burstable RAM allocation isn’t useful, but I try make sure that my mahcines stay within the garanteed amount generally and only use the burstable quota, if they use it at all, in bursts – but it isn’t possible to monitor this without knowing where the garanteed amount stops and the burstable amount starts.

          September 2, 2011 @ 10:23 am
    • There is no burst on any of our packages.



      September 2, 2011 @ 11:44 am
      • Dave:

        Really? That makes this offer even shinier. I might have to take two!

        You might want to explicitly state that somewhere (I know you say that “we do not over subscribe any of our nodes” but many cheap hosts say that while apparently not considering a bit (sometimes a lot) of RAM over-selling via burstable allocation to be over-subscription) as it differentiate you from a lot of hosts.

        September 2, 2011 @ 5:51 pm
  30. Running a 1GB box from them for about 4 months. Still satisfied.
    Just ordered a new 2GB box and got the details instantly.
    Hope Chris will not disappoint me.

    September 2, 2011 @ 12:05 pm
    • =( Forgots about the poor CNO here. *instant sad face* He may be the paper pusher and sweet deal talker, but I am the one here that stays up and baby’s these guys and make all the magic happen. lol.


      September 2, 2011 @ 1:14 pm
    • Cool Babar vai, Them I’ll order one too :)

      September 5, 2011 @ 2:36 pm
  31. I think the interesting this here is that the XEN packages are exactly the same price as the OpenVZ packages the OpenVZ are not offered with burst,.. maybe its just me but that certainly builds a point of trust initially, but 2GB for $7 sweet jebus how can their be any profit in that unless its an initial hit to increase customer base numbers.

    Definitely an offer worth checking out imo!

    Out of interest:
    how long is this offer open for ?
    is there a limit per customer ?
    Is there a limit overall, e.g. 30 uses only?

    September 2, 2011 @ 12:41 pm
    • Tom:

      I’m sure the offer is based on the experience of 1gb openvz customers, because most people will be just running some apache or nginx setup with up to 300MB of ram on this servers and a lot of ram will not be used.

      Also someone share cat /proc/user_beancounters, is it the same as 1GB servers?

      September 2, 2011 @ 12:48 pm
      • root@s6:~# cat /proc/user_beancounters 
        Version: 2.5
               uid  resource                     held              maxheld              barrier                limit              failcnt
              915:  kmemsize                   761989              1228314           2147483646           2147483646                    0
                    lockedpages                     0                    0               999999               999999                    0
                    privvmpages                 10136                14019               524288               524288                    0
                    shmpages                      640                  656               524288               524288                    0
                    dummy                           0                    0                    0                    0                    0
                    numproc                         9                   13               999999               999999                    0
                    physpages                    1407                 5327                    0           2147483647                    0
                    vmguarpages                     0                    0               524288           2147483647                    0
                    oomguarpages                 1407                 5327               524288           2147483647                    0
                    numtcpsock                      2                    3              7999992              7999992                    0
                    numflock                        1                    2               999999               999999                    0
                    numpty                          1                    1               500000               500000                    0
                    numsiginfo                      0                    2               999999               999999                    0
                    tcpsndbuf                   35008                52512            214748160            396774400                    0
                    tcprcvbuf                   32768              1825808            214748160            396774400                    0
                    othersockbuf                 2328                19784            214748160            396774400                    0
                    dgramrcvbuf                     0                 8472            214748160            396774400                    0
                    numothersock                    2                    5              7999992              7999992                    0
                    dcachesize                      0                    0           2147483646           2147483646                    0
                    numfile                       210                  314             23999976             23999976                    0
                    dummy                           0                    0                    0                    0                    0
                    dummy                           0                    0                    0                    0                    0
                    dummy                           0                    0                    0                    0                    0
                    numiptent                       4                    4               999999               999999                    0
        September 2, 2011 @ 10:26 pm
    • Hi,

      It is unlimited use, no limit per customer, and the offer is good for until the next offer is put up by LEA in generally a month or so.



      September 2, 2011 @ 1:26 pm
  32. Sounds more like one of those “too good to be true offers!”, I’d rather invest my money elsewhere because I tend to never trust a provider that says they will be around for a long time especially when only being in business for one year.

    September 2, 2011 @ 1:43 pm
  33. Willy:

    Well, lets say I order using the coupon code, so I only have to pay $7 for this month. But then how much do I have to pay for the next month? Still $7 or $24?

    Sorry if this is a noob question. I’m still new with this vps things.

    September 2, 2011 @ 3:28 pm
    • Stil $7. Have 5 with them.

      September 3, 2011 @ 4:08 am
    • @Willy,
      $7 is what you pay for the VPS each month.
      Could you please run the command: cat /proc/cpuinfo


      September 3, 2011 @ 4:10 am
      • Ill save you some time :)

        We run Dual E5620 @ 2.4GHz on all our new builds ( this last node is the 3rd one we have ).



        September 3, 2011 @ 4:21 am
  34. Jim:

    Really hoping you did DA but seen you don’t :-(

    September 2, 2011 @ 6:41 pm
  35. Does anyone got an 2048mb plan please let me know the number of cpucores?

    September 2, 2011 @ 6:43 pm
    • Kuro:

      I got 4 cores of an E5620 @ 2.4GHz on mine

      September 2, 2011 @ 7:48 pm
      • @Kuro,
        Thanks for providing exactly the information I need.

        September 2, 2011 @ 11:16 pm
  36. Spirit:

    Is VPS19 this new one? It seems like someone forget to enable iptables module :P Should we expect reboot soon? :)

    September 2, 2011 @ 7:24 pm
  37. Heinz:

    can’t initialize iptables table `nat’: Table does not exist (do you need to insmod?)
    Perhaps iptables or your kernel needs to be upgraded.


    September 2, 2011 @ 7:29 pm
    • Jeremiah will be working on this shortly.



      September 2, 2011 @ 8:37 pm
  38. t:

    Just signed up for a 2GB plan. Waiting for activation..

    September 2, 2011 @ 7:33 pm
  39. C:

    C:\temp>wget http://demo-ovz.chicagovps.net/150MB.zip
    --21:45:21-- http://demo-ovz.chicagovps.net/150MB.zip
    => `150MB.zip.1'
    Resolving demo-ovz.chicagovps.net... done.
    Connecting to demo-ovz.chicagovps.net[]:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 153,600,000 [application/zip]

    100%[====================================>] 153,600,000 1.32M/s ETA 00:00

    21:47:13 (1.32 MB/s) - `150MB.zip.1' saved [153600000/153600000]

    C:\temp>ping demo-ovz.chicagovps.net

    Skickar signaler till demo-ovz.chicagovps.net [] med 32 byte data

    Svar från byte=32 tid=151ms TTL=51
    Svar från byte=32 tid=152ms TTL=51
    Svar från byte=32 tid=138ms TTL=51
    Svar från byte=32 tid=140ms TTL=51

    Ping-statistik för
    Paket: Skickade = 4, mottagna = 4, Förlorade = 0 (0 %),
    Ungefärligt överföringstid i millisekunder:
    Lägsta = 138 ms, Högsta = 152 ms, Medel = 145 ms


    From europe. should work as a sweet vanilla minecraft server for the new update…

    Anyone running a minecraft server there now ?

    September 2, 2011 @ 7:49 pm
    • Im not sure about any of the people taking advantage of this sale, but I know we have quite a few MineCraft servers hosted on our network, we actually have a special template made for MineCraft Users :)



      September 3, 2011 @ 4:19 am
      • @Chris,
        Do you have vLAN for your boxes?

        September 3, 2011 @ 4:34 am
    • @C, impossible,

      September 3, 2011 @ 4:30 am
      • C:

        Want to tell me why?

        September 3, 2011 @ 4:10 pm
      • The ping is possible, my UK friend gets 90ms to a VPS in SC, and my VPS there gets 40ms to that test IP.

        September 4, 2011 @ 12:47 am
  40. t:

    Any chance of Cent6 or SciLi6 templates? Not a major deal but just wondering..

    September 2, 2011 @ 8:45 pm
  41. frantisheq:

    any chance for own date/time/timezone in openvz?

    September 2, 2011 @ 11:05 pm
    • rm -f /etc/localtime;ln -s /usr/share/zoneinfo/EST5EDT /etc/localtime

      Replace the timezone of choice.

      September 3, 2011 @ 1:10 am
      • I copy directly the file :P

        September 3, 2011 @ 1:43 am
        • Dave:

          The reason to use a link rather than copying the file is that your copy won’t get updated if a patch comes through that corrects the original (for DST changes and such). If you link to the file instead of copying it, you don’t need to manually re-copy if there are tweaks to the relevant timezone definition file.

          September 3, 2011 @ 9:48 am
      • rm:

        @Tim @Yomero @Dave
        are you guys barbarians, or something?

        # dpkg-reconfigure tzdata

        ^ doesn’t your OS provide a similar facility of configuring the timezone? O.o

        September 3, 2011 @ 9:54 am
        • I prefer to know how stuff really works, not depend on some tool that is distro specific since afterall, ALL distro’s are the same deep under the hood, only the haters vary a little :P

          September 3, 2011 @ 11:42 am
        • Dave:

          We were responding to someone who didn’t state which distro they were using or planning to use, so giving distro specific information might not have been helpful.

          Of course you might find some circumstances where /usr/share/zoneinfo/ is not the right location to link to (or copy from), but I’m pretty sure most (if not all) modern setups keep the tzdata files there.

          September 3, 2011 @ 12:36 pm
        • rm:

          Using GNU/Linux one *is* using some or another distro of it, unless you build something like LFS yourself. Doing things the low-lever way and not the distro way, is a surefire way to get problems in the future. Otherwise, what’s next, people ask you casually, ‘how do I install apache’, and you point them to download and build the Apache source code??

          September 3, 2011 @ 1:55 pm
        • Dave:

          @rm: installing Apache and changing your timezone are far from the same thing.

          In that instance I wouldn’t give any instructions at all at first, I’d instead as what OS variant that are currently running and give instructions in response to getting an answer to that.

          September 3, 2011 @ 3:00 pm
        • Spartaaaaaaaaaaans!!!!!

          go go go copy paste xDDDD

          September 3, 2011 @ 4:57 pm
      • frantisheq:

        it worked. i thought it won’t because i couldn’t change date in VPS from another provider and i read somewhere that it has to be enabled separately for every node. looks like all i had to do is try :) thanks

        September 3, 2011 @ 9:56 am
        • rm:

          You can not change date or time on OpenVZ, however you can adjust the time zone.

          September 3, 2011 @ 10:02 am
        • Dave:

          It is usual for the hardware clocks to be set to UTC anyway, no matter where in the world the machine is. /etc/localtime and similar configuration set how this UTC time source is translated by default. You can even set the timezone per user if you like – if all times are correctly stored at UTC it doesn’t matter that one user sees this translated to EST and another sees it translated to PST.

          September 3, 2011 @ 12:39 pm
  42. Jonathan:

    Awesome deal, Good luck Chris .

    September 3, 2011 @ 2:13 am
  43. Wira:

    Very nice offer… I have one profesional vps with them from their last promo..
    No issue and vps runs very good.. I’m on vps12 node.
    Good luck with this one.. :)

    September 3, 2011 @ 2:51 am
  44. In:

    What about Centos 6?

    September 3, 2011 @ 7:57 am
  45. Is promo discount for first month only or lifetime of account?

    September 3, 2011 @ 4:12 pm
    • recurrent promo, but not sure applicable to monthly payment. Will they not last long ???

      September 3, 2011 @ 5:13 pm
  46. where they are now ????
    my box not yet activated

    September 3, 2011 @ 5:12 pm
    • It has been taking for a while but not provisioned yet.
      I have just got boxes from other two providers and already activated and been testing.

      September 3, 2011 @ 6:45 pm
      • Spirit:

        How many days are you waiting?

        September 3, 2011 @ 7:26 pm
        • No one has been waiting days, its been a couple of hours at most. We ran out of IP’s and are waiting on an allocation, everyone will be setup within the hour.



          September 3, 2011 @ 8:04 pm
        • Spirit:

          I was kidding :)

          September 3, 2011 @ 8:06 pm
        • :) I didnt know haha

          September 3, 2011 @ 8:10 pm
        • Everyone is now up that ordered today.



          September 3, 2011 @ 10:18 pm
      • @Chris,
        Hope you will not give me another 10hour waiting. I’d rather to wait because I am afraid of being in a crowded node :P

        September 3, 2011 @ 9:40 pm
  47. Shaiffulnizam Mohamad:

    Hi, need to ask, IF I were about to pay for 12 months for the Enterprise, how much do I need to pay? Are the 7 USD still applicable to me? Or the USD 7 is only applicable to one month?

    System messages :

    The promotion code you entered has been applied to your cart but no items qualify for the discount yet – please check the promotion terms

    Description Price
    OpenVZ VPS – Enterprise (svr.axxxxxxxxx)
    » Operating System: CentOS 5 x86
    $254.49 USD
    [Edit Configuration] [Remove]
    Subtotal: $254.49 USD
    $17.95 USD Recurring Discount: $0.00 USD
    Total Due Today: $254.49 USD
    Total Recurring: $254.49 USD Annually


    September 3, 2011 @ 10:44 pm
    • The 2048 promo code is applicable to monthly payment, not annually one. Not sure why, they may not last too long, I guess :)

      September 3, 2011 @ 11:02 pm
      • Shaiffulnizam Mohamad:

        owhh.. so this is really a high risk host. hehe. tq for replying to my post tinyray

        September 3, 2011 @ 11:15 pm
        • Why do you guys have to say false things? I just dont get it :(

          We try and have a nice offer for you guys and you have to say negative things about us.

          We just prefer month to month revenue and I don’t see the difference, all you have to do is enable automatic payments. There would be no more discount for a yearly payment so after a year either method would be equal.



          September 3, 2011 @ 11:22 pm
        • Dave:

          @Chris: I think people are just being cautious because the offer is significantly better than others are giving at the moment – it is tripping the “too good to be true” nerve so we are looking for the catch. I doubt it is anything personal against you, it is just perfectly healthy paranoia!

          September 3, 2011 @ 11:34 pm
        • @Chris,
          Just kidding, never mind.
          Anyway, please help me out with the ip problem. I am not why a tracert could not reach my vps IP.

          September 4, 2011 @ 12:05 am
        • Shaiffulnizam Mohamad:

          Soory Christ, we are just curious, It doesn’t mean we don’t like it. :) I just subscribe one just now.. would love to test it. But the IP seems nowhere to be found.

          September 4, 2011 @ 12:44 am
  48. Amazing!!!
    But I still have a problem with my box; I can access it using console utility in control panel but the SSH desktop program. Does anyone know what to tackle the problem?

    September 3, 2011 @ 10:45 pm
    • OK, the problem is because the IP provided is unknown, :(

      September 3, 2011 @ 10:53 pm
      • Rodrigo:

        Same problem here.

        September 4, 2011 @ 12:20 am
        • Shaiffulnizam Mohamad:

          ermm I think they must have been to many signups and not enough IP. They should rectify this error ASAP, befire other new customers feels been cheated.

          September 4, 2011 @ 12:42 am
        • Rodrigo:

          Problem solved.

          September 4, 2011 @ 2:35 am
      • It was not a problem, just a typo mistake.

        September 4, 2011 @ 2:59 am
        • Yes this is correct, I happened to add the IP wrong and forgot a number :( Im really sorry everyone for the mistake and time it took to fix it all.



          September 4, 2011 @ 3:03 am
        • Shaiffulnizam Mohamad:

          Tq chris, finally I can test the VPS, and play around it. Tq again.

          September 4, 2011 @ 1:01 pm
  49. daryl:

    How long is everyone’s avg wait for support tickets? Maybe I just filed them at off times, one from last night is still in the queue.

    September 4, 2011 @ 12:33 am
    • Ruby Doodle:

      @daryl… I filed one last night and worked with support for a couple of hours. I logged in today and THAT support ticked was gone. I submitted another today. (FYI… Server has been up, but the IP is not making it to the box.)

      September 4, 2011 @ 10:15 pm
  50. My box,

    [root@chi2048 ~]# cat /proc/cpuinfo
    processor       : 0
    vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
    cpu family      : 6
    model           : 44
    model name      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           E5620  @ 2.40GHz
    stepping        : 2
    cpu MHz         : 2400.147
    cache size      : 12288 KB
    physical id     : 0
    siblings        : 8
    core id         : 0
    cpu cores       : 4
    apicid          : 0
    fpu             : yes
    fpu_exception   : yes
    cpuid level     : 11
    wp              : yes
    flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc ida nonstop_tsc arat pni monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt lahf_lm
    bogomips        : 4800.29
    clflush size    : 64
    cache_alignment : 64
    address sizes   : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
    power management: [8]
    processor       : 1
    vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
    cpu family      : 6
    model           : 44
    model name      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           E5620  @ 2.40GHz
    stepping        : 2
    cpu MHz         : 2400.147
    cache size      : 12288 KB
    physical id     : 0
    siblings        : 8
    core id         : 8
    cpu cores       : 4
    apicid          : 16
    fpu             : yes
    fpu_exception   : yes
    cpuid level     : 11
    wp              : yes
    flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc ida nonstop_tsc arat pni monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt lahf_lm
    bogomips        : 4800.08
    clflush size    : 64
    cache_alignment : 64
    address sizes   : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
    power management: [8]
    processor       : 2
    vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
    cpu family      : 6
    model           : 44
    model name      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           E5620  @ 2.40GHz
    stepping        : 2
    cpu MHz         : 2400.147
    cache size      : 12288 KB
    physical id     : 0
    siblings        : 8
    core id         : 9
    cpu cores       : 4
    apicid          : 18
    fpu             : yes
    fpu_exception   : yes
    cpuid level     : 11
    wp              : yes
    flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc ida nonstop_tsc arat pni monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt lahf_lm
    bogomips        : 4800.14
    clflush size    : 64
    cache_alignment : 64
    address sizes   : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
    power management: [8]
    processor       : 3
    vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
    cpu family      : 6
    model           : 44
    model name      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           E5620  @ 2.40GHz
    stepping        : 2
    cpu MHz         : 2400.147
    cache size      : 12288 KB
    physical id     : 0
    siblings        : 8
    core id         : 10
    cpu cores       : 4
    apicid          : 20
    fpu             : yes
    fpu_exception   : yes
    cpuid level     : 11
    wp              : yes
    flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc ida nonstop_tsc arat pni monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt lahf_lm
    bogomips        : 4800.14
    clflush size    : 64
    cache_alignment : 64
    address sizes   : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
    power management: [8]
    [root@chi2048 ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm -f test
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 20.4043 seconds, 52.6 MB/s

    IO is not good at all, :(

    September 4, 2011 @ 3:00 am
    • Hello,

      I wouldn’t say that it is terrible, but yes your right its not the best, but still OK.

      I will look into this and see whats going on, I have a feeling we may have an abuser that I will look into.



      September 4, 2011 @ 3:04 am
      • @Chris,
        Its much higher than 75mb/s now. There were probably many of your customers doing the io test yesterday. :)

        Good deal so far,

        September 4, 2011 @ 3:41 pm
    • Tom:

      If 50MB/s is so terrible for you then you should really stop buying any LEBs from this blog.

      September 4, 2011 @ 7:57 am
      • circus:

        Yeah, 50MB/s is ok.. even linode io is probably around that.. it seem like everyone want 100MB/s nowadays..

        September 4, 2011 @ 9:27 am
      • Tom,
        Franc should be so sad to hear that, :)

        September 4, 2011 @ 3:44 pm
  51. bris:

    Horrible CPU speed. Taking about 5 minutes to do a simple apt-get upgrade (already downloaded files just installing standard files about 10 of them)

    September 4, 2011 @ 4:36 am
    • Meester Sneeky:

      I got the enterprise vps and the one I got executes everything about 50% faster than does my VPS from alienvps.

      September 4, 2011 @ 8:17 pm
      • Same here. Worse still, my vps with alienvps (on node ny9) has been down for over 12 hours. Support told me there had been a hard disk failure on that node, but no data has been lost, and to wait for service to resume. No timeframe on when the service will resume has been given, even when I asked them repeatedly on it. Good thing I didn’t sink my money into the monthly services, but took up this offer instead.

        September 5, 2011 @ 7:21 am
  52. Just got myself a box, seems like my order is still pending. Any idea how long this would take before I get to use it? Hope it won’t be until next month when I have to pay again… Also, helping a few of my other interested friends ask, is openvpn,irc or shoutcast allowed?

    September 4, 2011 @ 8:19 am
    • Spirit:

      Naah, you will get it somewhere between 22th and 24th sept… so you will have plenty of time to use it before next billing period. Happy?

      September 4, 2011 @ 8:44 pm
      • Nope. I asked support and they said that they were waiting for a new ip allocation, also my vps has been activated a few hours ago. Pretty fast service for something that would have at least hundreds of orders waiting. Support was fast too (Although it wasn’t so fast during the day as I am 12 hours ‘faster’ than the US due to timezones, but that is understandable)My current quick testing also gave pretty impressive results. Good work ChicagoVPS!

        September 5, 2011 @ 7:26 am
        • Spirit:

          I know. I made a joke from your “just got box – still pending – outrageous” impatience :)

          September 5, 2011 @ 10:33 am
  53. Will going to try it.

    September 4, 2011 @ 12:06 pm
  54. Craig:

    my question : what is not allowed ?
    (irc, torrent, adult, etc) ?

    September 4, 2011 @ 7:23 pm
  55. dave:

    can I run Java VM on your vps?

    September 4, 2011 @ 7:42 pm
  56. For those of you who are still making the decision whether to get one or not, here is the 96MB.com review for the VPS:

    Honestly, I have to say I am surprised by how good the performance is although the price seems insane, but really, things are pretty good with it and I would hope this will be the starting point of a new game changer.

    September 5, 2011 @ 1:19 am
    • Hello,

      Thank you for the great review :) I would love to answer some of the peoples questions on WHT but unfortunately I have been banned for about 3 years now :( that hate me haha. Anyway I am glad that you like our service, as we strive for the best.

      GREAT review again :)



      September 5, 2011 @ 1:36 am
      • @Chris, no worries, and thanks a lot for providing such great service to the low end box community as well. Keep up the good work!

        September 5, 2011 @ 2:51 am
  57. I just saw your offer for 7$/mth VPS offer. The 15$ license cost for WHM/cpanel license is separate or it’s included. cos, when i try to order the image with CentOS + WHM/cpanel still it shows me 7$/mth.

    September 5, 2011 @ 6:13 am
    • Spirit:

      This image is usually just to make things for some people with cPanel easier but it don’t include cPanel license. If you really want it you need to opt cPanel/WHM under addons (and this will cost you 15$ of course).

      September 5, 2011 @ 10:29 am
      • Oops…! I thought of moving from my reseller hosting from HostGator to this VPS, as it’s 7$/mth. Seems it’s not worth. I wonder what for so many folks are buying this VPS 2GB ram stuff, if it’s not for reselling/hosting purpose…?

        September 5, 2011 @ 4:51 pm
        • Dave:

          For people doing web hosting: they might have an existing cPanel or DirectAdmin license to transfer, or they might be using something like DTC (http://www.gplhost.com/software-dtc_5download.html) or OpenPanel (http://www.openpanel.com/)

          But there are any number of other tasks that could make use of more RAM than you usually get in a VPS at this price.

          September 5, 2011 @ 5:01 pm
        • No, hosting isn’t all in the Internet, lol

          voice servers, game servers, irc, dedicated databases, or just, idling.

          September 5, 2011 @ 5:02 pm
        • Spirit:

          “I wonder what for so many folks are buying this VPS 2GB ram stuff”

          Because similar specifications will cost you 3x – 5x more elsewhere.

          “it’s not for reselling/hosting purpose”

          Why not? Because cpanel license isn’t included and you need to pay 15$ extra for that? That’s same as with other hosts. You need to pay those 15$ or so for license everywhere if you want to have it on OWN server.

          You need to understand the difference between “reseller hosting from HostGator” and virtual private server. You’re limited with one reseller hosting with hostgator. VPS + cpanel license would give you posability to host plenty those reseller accounts + give you more control. So why it couldn’t be for reselling purpose? It’s right opposite.

          September 5, 2011 @ 5:12 pm
  58. @Date, @Yomera – Thanks. But, I’m not sure how it’s profitable to get a server even with 32GB they can sell only for 16 folks. It would cost 300$/mth if they rent it, atleast >$1,000/mth if they’ve bought it and I believe they’re colocating. They’ll just get $100+/month How it’ll be profitable ? They’ve to wait for 12 months, ok after 12 months, the server is their’s, but, still they’ve to pay colo rent, bandwidth, etc. I don’t understand. Just wondering. A lot of us would also do this if it’s profitable.

    @Spirit – Ya, but, setting up our VPS with all the Addon’s provided by HostGator reseller/vps is much cheaper than VPS option.

    September 5, 2011 @ 5:42 pm
    • Today I changed my sex… damn.

      And yes, is the same question that everyone here is wondering.

      September 5, 2011 @ 5:55 pm
      • @Yomero, Looking for a date? :-P haha your post gave me a good laugh.

        @Jinshans, Id like to know what type of addons you are talking about, I am pretty sure if we discuss this via email I can beat any price you are getting from Host Gator. I will not discuss our business model since it works for us and only us. I can say we do own our own hardware ( all fully paid off ) so your numbers are a little off.



        September 5, 2011 @ 6:05 pm
        • LOL! Not yet, I need to assimilate this new change that jinishans has imposed on me Q_Q

          September 5, 2011 @ 6:38 pm
        • Sure, I’ll pls let me know which email i need to contact. but, if you guys really wan’t to go big, you may need to allow others do the same job, probably you folks can offer service for managing the servers.

          say for example, i was checking with all the biggies how much it would cost to setup a Xen kind of server, so that I myself can sell VMs, in India for less cost.

          September 5, 2011 @ 6:58 pm
    • Dave:

      I’m not particularly familiar with OpenVZ from the hosts PoV, but it is possible that allthe RAM your VM sees is not in real RAM all the time – it could be paged out to the hosts swap areas. I know VMWare can operate in this manner. If this is the case then the host would grind away slowly if every VM was actively using all its allocated RAM, but as a lot of the VMs will only be actively using some of their allocation it works out better than that. You are getting achunk of virtual memory which may be spread over RAM and disk at any given time. It is up to the people running the host how to balance the amount of RAM against the amount of virtual memory (RAM plus swap areas), and you just have to hope that they’ve got that balance right (i.e. not too little real RAM for things to run smoothly generally).

      So a 32Gb machine could easily run more than 16 2Gb VMs perfecly well depending what those VMs are doing, a lot more if many of them are only actively using 512Mb or less as Wesley reports his is above. How many more is what the hosts need to guess correctly to maximise their income without performance degrading too much for their customers. If you look at Wesley’s output from “free” you’ll see 0 cache and 0 buffers – that is because OpenVZ is OS-level virtualisation not machine level (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenVZ#OpenVZ_compared_to_other_Virtualization_Technologies) so there is only really one kernel and one shared set of cache+buffers – in a lot of instances much of the memory used by a physical non-virtualised machine with plenty of RAM is cache+buffers so you don’t have to account for this in your VM’s allocation (but it being a shared resource means how efficient it is for you depends again on what all the other VMs are up to).

      This isn’t the same as overselling (when you have a garantee amount and more you can burst into) as your processes can allocate all the memory at any time rather than just in bursts. It can be mixed with overselling via burstable memory though.

      The economics of VM based hosting is a lot more nuanced than 32Gb==16x2Gb guests per host.

      (anyone with more detailed knowledge of OpenVZ, feel free to chine in and correctly me where I am wrong!)

      September 5, 2011 @ 6:09 pm
      • Yep, I think that is the idea. And if some customers start to use more RAM and degrade performance, you can distribute some of them randomly in less loaded nodes n_n

        September 5, 2011 @ 6:40 pm
      • yep, that’s what i too was wondering. i don’t know how can one server physical 2GB RAM for more than 16 customers if it’s real, that would be tooooo costlier right ?

        September 5, 2011 @ 6:55 pm
    • Kuro:

      With VPS’s of this size, it would make much more sense to have 48-64GB RAM on the host node ;)

      September 5, 2011 @ 8:21 pm
      • Kuro,

        We only run and utilize the best parts. I cannot go into specifics of the machines, but I can say that you are on the right track :)



        September 5, 2011 @ 8:30 pm
  59. I just ran across this site today. I have found some very usefull information here today. I have a few questions for Chris or Jeremiah if they do not mind.

    Is this discount for the life of the service with you?
    Will the price ever go back to normal for the people who signup under the deal price?
    Do you support slackware?
    Not just a slack template but a full install?
    Would I be allowed to configure and customize the vps any way I wish, with in the confines of the tos and aup of course?

    Thank you for your time and for offering this great deal.

    September 5, 2011 @ 6:58 pm
    • Hi,

      The cost of the VPS is for the life of the account so long as the account do not go under default.

      I can support slackware pretty well. It is not one of the distro’s i prefer, but once you know one, you pretty much know all of them except for their individual tweaks and different CLI parameters.

      Next, you can customize your VPS all you want, so long as it is not abusive to other customers or violates the ToS/AUP.



      September 5, 2011 @ 8:27 pm
      • veer:

        “Next, you can customize your VPS all you want, so long as it is not abusive to other customers or violates the ToS/AUP”

        Can you elaborate on how the usage of one vps be abusive to other customers, unless you are challenging some hacker groups to break your vps!
        I was under the impression that your deal should be almost immune to co-user abuse considering zero burst memory. i.e the 2GB you are offering is guaranteed and you don’t give any extra burst memory.

        forgive me if im being tooo noob to the subject.


        September 6, 2011 @ 4:33 am
        • I have an example… Gentoo is SO abusive xD

          September 6, 2011 @ 5:53 am
  60. Jeremiah, if you dont mind me asking,
    What are the full specs for the host node #19, and how many VPS’s do you have hosted in it ?
    The unixbench scored pretty low for those Xeon processors. But still its a great deal, thanks for this offer!

    Unix Bench Test

    Dhrystone 2 using register variables 376783.7 25368226.7 673.3
    Double-Precision Whetstone 83.1 1322.2 159.1
    Execl Throughput 188.3 6096.3 323.8
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 2672.0 237206.0 887.7
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1077.0 64525.0 599.1
    File Read 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 15382.0 1996205.0 1297.8
    Pipe-based Context Switching 15448.6 829385.4 536.9
    Pipe Throughput 111814.6 2832987.9 253.4
    Process Creation 569.3 27903.2 490.1
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 44.8 1993.0 444.9
    System Call Overhead 114433.5 2333548.2 203.9
    FINAL SCORE 447.7

    September 5, 2011 @ 10:49 pm
    • As stated previously i cannot go into details of the production environment.



      September 6, 2011 @ 12:14 am
      • bris:

        Must be oversold like crazy =-\

        September 6, 2011 @ 12:24 am
        • yep, i only doubt the oversold thing on this server. I might be a small customer, but, still wan’ted to know as the co’ we’re talking about is also small compared to the big players providing VPS nowadays like vps.net, linode, etc.

          Also, i really wan’t to avail this offer, but, when i tried to download the 100mb & 150mb files from Hoffman Estates, IL, which is 30 miles away from from Chicago, infact 10-20 miles from their colocation provider, it took around 2min-3min for these files to download, which is really long time, considering lot of posts above says the IO is not great, and even the review also says same thing.

          Even big players nowadays provide the Server detail for their VPS offering, I think it’ll be great if Chris/Jer. can provide more insight on the server details, # of customers they’ll max. support per dedi server, as for someone like me moving my business to them, this info would be critical.

          September 6, 2011 @ 12:37 am
        • Are you bashing us just because I cannot go into exact details? We have our limits and we stick with them.



          September 6, 2011 @ 12:38 am
        • You’re making it look more and more like you are trying to hide info from your customers with this evasion tactic you are using. Simply tell them the hardware, nobody reveals customers per node on OpenVZ, so I see no reason to hear as well, but the hardware used, most are proud of it and share with the class.

          September 6, 2011 @ 1:11 am
        • Tim,

          I highly disagree. I am hardly hiding information for anyone. The information you need is posted above. We run e5620 processors and enterprise drives. What more matters on what we run?

          I am very proud of our hardware, but at the same time, go find your own hardware you are proud to run instead of going to copy ours and to do what we are doing.



          September 6, 2011 @ 1:15 am
        • Trust me, copying you guys is the furthest thing on my mind, I don’t need to downgrade my nodes.

          September 6, 2011 @ 1:31 am
        • Tim,

          I’m pretty sure that our current hardware would be an upgrade over yours, that’s how much “I” believe in our hardware and know that most providers do not spend the money we do.

          Go back to your broken website that doesn’t even load.



          September 6, 2011 @ 1:59 am
        • Chris,

          You believe what you want, I know I use better hardware, I tried to keep my service out of it, but since you want to drag it in, while you’re using older CPU’s and maybe software raid if not single disk, I’m using current E3-1200’s and hardware raid10. And to put more ire in your bonnet, 96mb.com shows it himself, your geekbench with 4 cores on this offer is a respectable 5600, but no match for even my lowest package with a single core at 5800 http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/463206

          Site doesn’t load for you? You must have been blocked hitting port 80 since 99.9% of my traffic is on port 443 and the site has been SYN flooded all weekend but I’ve kept it up for the most part, but it happens to us all.

          Maybe next time answer the customers interested in your service with a straight answer instead of of picking a match with someone that can clearly clean your clock on performance and service.

          September 6, 2011 @ 2:36 am
        • Tim,

          We have several E3-1240’s with 16GB of ram on them. If you take into consideration both of our processors in SMP still have just about 300 passmarks higher.

          As a side note, we prefer to utilize 5600 series processors and have been for awhile as they have given us a very good performance.

          Our E3’s are for service machines, like our web servers, name servers, backup servers, as well as our solusvm.

          Regarding your website, i have had several people check from geographically diverse locations, none of which are able to load your site.



          September 6, 2011 @ 2:48 am
        • Since I’ve already said my site is being SYN flooded, what’s your point?

          And while your E5620 SMP does score 9541 and my E3-1230’s score 8374 for passmark, neither of us are passing the whole node to the customer, so it doesn’t matter, I obviously must deploy more nodes but it gives the customer a superior, higher performing experience, and that does matter. You clearly like your 5600’s, I like the E3’s for nodes, so you started way off base attacking me earlier, and Chris followed suite, when all I suggested was giving your interested customers the answers they sought, so you’re still hiding the info from them in my eyes. CPU does not make a VPS node, the IO subsystem does, and this is the issue you both have been avoiding. I’d be ashamed if any of my OpenVZ nodes returned 50-100MB/sec dd tests, that is clearly not hardware raid, or massively oversold.

          September 6, 2011 @ 3:30 am
        • Dave:

          This is starting to get personal and silly, and making *both* sides look bad. Calm down children, and play nice.

          September 6, 2011 @ 10:27 am
        • Meester Sneeky:

          Tim Flavin appears to be butt-hurt and jealous of ChicagoVPS.

          September 6, 2011 @ 7:02 pm
        • Dave:

          @MeesterSneeky: Shh. They’ve calmed down, don’t stir it up again. Let us just give the offer a try if we are going to (and not if we’d prefer not) and let real world results decide whether the offer is good/bad/ugly.

          September 7, 2011 @ 12:41 am
  61. I highly doubt it took that long to download it. 100MB files take a matter of seconds to download.



    September 6, 2011 @ 12:39 am
  62. @Jeremiah – Def. not sir. I just wanted to know more details about your physical server detaisl, as the review, few folks here on IO says it’s slow and downloading 100mb takes 2-3 min and 150mb from your server takes 5min. Also, i believe VPS providers generally tell the server details of their server. If i’m wrong, pls correct me.

    pls let me know your email id, i can send screenshot of it/any other way to test thru any website for the download test.

    Concern is, if it’s taking 5min from 10 miles away, how much time it would take from other country..! Hope you understand my concern.

    September 6, 2011 @ 1:06 am
  63. My email is jshinkle [at] chicagovps [dot] net.


    September 6, 2011 @ 1:12 am
  64. john:

    took 5 min to download 100mb and I am in L.A

    September 6, 2011 @ 1:43 am
    • It is a demo server and hardly a reflection of our services. If this is what you have to complain about, I am sorry you have to much spare time on your hands….

      September 6, 2011 @ 1:47 am
      • Jermey – Anyway, I’ve ordered 1 for 7$/mth to try it out. I’m not sure you provide any moneyback for a month, or atleast a week. Let me try it out.

        September 6, 2011 @ 2:10 am
    • @John,
      To be fair, I think you need to check with data hosted elsewhere; just log in your box and download this: ftp://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/databases/IntAct/current/all.zip which is in UK, my box did 675kb/s, or try this one: ftp://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/DATA/GENE_INFO/All_Data.gene_info.gz which is in Washington. Its hard to figure out the issue using your home PC.

      September 6, 2011 @ 2:06 am
      • From my ChicagoVPS:

         wget -O /dev/null ftp://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/databases/IntAct/current/all.zip
        --2011-09-06 11:19:27--  ftp://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/databases/IntAct/current/all.zip
                   => `/dev/null'
        Resolving ftp.ebi.ac.uk...
        Connecting to ftp.ebi.ac.uk||:21... connected.
        Logging in as anonymous ... Logged in!
        ==> SYST ... done.    ==> PWD ... done.
        ==> TYPE I ... done.  ==> CWD (1) /pub/databases/IntAct/current ... done.
        ==> SIZE all.zip ... 873799144
        ==> PASV ... done.    ==> RETR all.zip ... done.
        Length: 873799144 (833M) (unauthoritative)
        100%[======================================>] 873,799,144  678K/s   in 21m 19s
        2011-09-06 11:40:49 (667 KB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [873799144]
        September 6, 2011 @ 9:23 am
  65. @Tim Flavin: I like your novice suggestion that CVPS is using single SATA disks. Move along.

    September 6, 2011 @ 3:47 am
  66. Alex:

    I would buy this, but they don’t accept AlertPay.

    Do you plan to accept AlertPay for payments, Chris?

    September 6, 2011 @ 9:18 am
    • @Chris,
      It would be nice if you could consider this suggestion.

      September 6, 2011 @ 2:45 pm
  67. khosach:

    please active my account. i can not pay for you, i sent ticket #929492 for you.

    September 6, 2011 @ 9:51 am
    • Corey:

      As stated on their Twitter page, as well as in the Portal Home: “09/06/2011 02:48 – We are working on getting all of our orders filled. Pending new machines being setup. :)”

      You have to have a little bit of patience, this is an amazing deal, and as such, is probably getting hit with many activations.

      September 6, 2011 @ 2:05 pm
      • Corey,

        Thanks for your understanding, we have got hit with more orders than expected. The node should be up today, tomorrow at worst.



        September 6, 2011 @ 2:40 pm
        • Dave:

          Of course with the previous nodes being officially full, now would be a good time for people to post performance stats as they’ll be more realistic than those posted from a VM on a newly commissioned host machine that is nearly empty!

          September 6, 2011 @ 2:59 pm
        • Corey:


          What tests do you want? I’m new to VPS’s, so I don’t know what the usual tests are, but I’d be happy to run them on mine.

          September 6, 2011 @ 6:35 pm
        • Dave:

          @Corry and @jinishams: I’m not particularly familiar with OpenVZ myself (I have worked a fair bit with VMWare and VirtualBox but they are hypervisor based rather than shared kernel arrangements, so their performance metrics are going to be different). Generally speaking though dd is not a good benchmark for real world performance as it is only testing bulk single-stream sequential throughput, something that doesn’t happen all that often except on low-concurrent-use fileservers primarily hosting large files. Testing tools like Bonnie++ give much more meaningful results, or if you plan to use something like mysql there will be test suits specific for them (which will test against their typical balance of CPU, memory and I/O use rather than testing just the base I/O subsystem).

          I wasn’t asking for specific tests myself, I was just suggesting now woudl be a good time to retest if people had tried with empty hosts before. I’ve ordered one myself to have a kick around. If it has decent performance it will replace a VM I have elsewhere that has started to bog down in terms of network throughput (and is getting a tad full on its smaller disk quota too), if it turns out to not be up to what I need I can cancel and all I’ve lost is $7 for the few weeks testing time (or $14 if I’m not organised enough to get stuff played with in the first month!).

          September 7, 2011 @ 12:38 am
      • @Dave Me too new to VPS. pls let me know how to test IO/speed of this VPS. I’m not a Linux person, any link for help would be great.

        September 6, 2011 @ 6:45 pm
  68. b1naryth1ef:

    Up until the past few days I would have given Chicago VPS a high recommendation, but it seems with this offer they’ve decided to shove everyone on two nodes (17 and 18). Sure this would be fine, except for the way Disk IO has dropped. I normally got a high 70-80 MB/s disk IO, however I’ve been testing all day and it hasn’t gotten above 45 MB/s. It’s taking almost 20 seconds to list a small directory. I submitted a support ticket and they’ve completely ignored me. I’m really disappointed on how they’ve dropped supporting old customers for the new shiny ones.

    The current disk IO:

    root@surv:~/mc# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 43.8092 s, 24.5 MB/s

    September 6, 2011 @ 7:11 pm
    • Corey:

      I just ran this on mine (node 17)

      root@vps2:~$ dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
      16384+0 records in
      16384+0 records out
      1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 18.5579 s, 57.9 MB/s

      While not great, I don’t think its terrible.

      September 6, 2011 @ 7:38 pm
      • b1naryth1ef:

        It still suggests overselling, or at least they are stressing the servers. Mine is still not going above 40 MB/s…

        September 6, 2011 @ 7:45 pm
        • I would try your tests again, since the node is full there will not be any more installs going on. Also I know Jeremiah was doing some work on the node today.



          September 7, 2011 @ 3:04 am
        • b1naryth1ef:

          Still pretty low on Node 17. I’ve seen it up to 60 MB/s, but no higher then that. Just checked again now:

          dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
          16384+0 records in
          16384+0 records out
          1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 31.8248 s, 33.7 MB/s

          root@surv:~/mc# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
          16384+0 records in
          16384+0 records out
          1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 22.2612 s, 48.2 MB/s

          root@surv:~/mc# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
          16384+0 records in
          16384+0 records out
          1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 27.4056 s, 39.2 MB/s

          Might be someone hogging disk resources? It’s just a little frustrating as I’m trying to run a Minecraft server which (of course) is fairly disk intensive.

          September 7, 2011 @ 4:51 am
        • And consistently running the command back to back also does no purpose other than over load the I/O.

          For your torrenting people, i have been cracking down on you very hard…. This is what is eating up most of your peer’s I/O. 2 people suspended here in the last few minutes that 35GB+ of torrents downloaded.



          September 7, 2011 @ 4:58 am
        • Maybe YOU b1naryth1ef hogging disk resources :|

          September 7, 2011 @ 5:19 am
        • b1naryth1ef:

          Actually running the command back-to-back tells you whether or not it’s just a IO spike or a slow disk. It’s definitely getting faster, but still not where i need it:

          root@surv:~/mc# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
          16384+0 records in
          16384+0 records out
          1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 19.1985 s, 55.9 MB/s

          I don’t think I’m hogging disk resources, as I’m not copying lots of data all at once (just copying small data in a *hopefully* short period of time), and I shut all disk items down before testing.

          September 7, 2011 @ 4:50 pm
    • rkrazy:

      Here is the latest on node 19. Similar results for the past 4 days now.

      [root@vps3 ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
      16384+0 records in
      16384+0 records out
      1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 14.6979 seconds, 73.1 MB/s
      [root@vps3 ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
      16384+0 records in
      16384+0 records out
      1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 14.652 seconds, 73.3 MB/s
      [root@vps3 ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
      16384+0 records in
      16384+0 records out
      1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 13.2027 seconds, 81.3 MB/s
      September 6, 2011 @ 10:58 pm
    • Buck Mamma:

      Node 16 here (I guess I ordered early)…

      For what it’s worth…

      dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
      16384+0 records in
      16384+0 records out
      1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 13.0964 s, 82.0 MB/s


      dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
      16384+0 records in
      16384+0 records out
      1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 13.6654 s, 78.6 MB/s
      dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
      16384+0 records in
      16384+0 records out
      1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 13.6396 s, 78.7 MB/s
      September 7, 2011 @ 1:03 am
  69. wizard:

    Node 19

    dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 26.9258 seconds, 39.9 MB/s
           uid  resource                     held              maxheld              barrier                limit              failcnt
                physpages                  120219               332900                    0           2147483647                    0
                oomguarpages               120670               332900               524288           2147483647                    0
    Swapped out: 451 pages, or 1804 KiB
    September 6, 2011 @ 8:51 pm
  70. Com7:

    Hi Chris,

    My 2 new VPS’s are still in pending status. Can you let us all know when commisioning of the new servers is completed? Also don’t forget the extra IP’s…

    – David

    September 7, 2011 @ 1:22 am
  71. How long is the wait for setup if I may ask?

    Guys please relax. They have a lot on their plate and are doing the best they can. The popularity of this kind of deal must be astronomical.

    Yes the servers may be a little full but I am sure they are trying to sort it out. Give them a chance and have some patience.

    Fights serve no purpose on the internet at all. They make people look stupid most of the time.

    I will be willing to give them a go and see how it works out. My suggestion for the price would be to do the same and stop trying to use this site for support or bashing. If you are having a problem use their support staff and try to rectify it with them and not here.

    September 7, 2011 @ 2:29 am
    • Corey:

      It was less than a day for my last order. I just received my email a few minutes ago after ordering late last night. Node 20.

      September 7, 2011 @ 2:37 am
      • Corey,

        All pending orders are now installed :)

        Thanks for your patience.



        September 7, 2011 @ 3:05 am
        • Corey:

          Thanks Chris, no complaints from me. Great service. Thanks.

          September 7, 2011 @ 3:22 am
  72. Instant activation, awesome job guys. Site runs smooth as butter on my Android tablet. Definitely liking so far will do some testing. Once again nice job guys.

    September 7, 2011 @ 3:49 am
  73. I tried to sign up but gues offer ended,if offer is avaial email me plz at vijaykudal@gmail.com

    September 7, 2011 @ 8:32 am
  74. My results from node 19 are worse:

    dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 35.7002 s, 30.1 MB/s
    September 7, 2011 @ 4:25 pm
    • Oops, network error. Someone please delete this post. Sorry about that.

      September 7, 2011 @ 4:29 pm
    • Meester Sneeky:

      That’s pretty low. But a better benchmark would be to test how well your applications perform. dd won’t necessarily predict how well any application will perform, so you better just test your application.

      September 7, 2011 @ 4:29 pm
  75. My results from node 19 are worse:

    dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 35.7002 s, 30.1 MB/s
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 63.0066 s, 17.0 MB/s
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 60.6811 s, 17.7 MB/s

    What just happened in that node?

    September 7, 2011 @ 4:28 pm
    • Dave:

      Could be lots of VMs being asked to run I/O performance tests…!

      There was an email earlier about some VPSs being live-migrated to different hosts for load balancing/ I imaging that could be an I/O intensive (as well as network intensive) operation to perhaps there is such a process happening on your node at the moment?

      September 7, 2011 @ 4:36 pm
      • I have no idea what is running in that node. I am only running a irc bouncer and hoping to install some openvpn software, but this IO performance is really making things difficult.

        September 7, 2011 @ 4:41 pm
        • Daniel:

          Use OpenvpnAS as its quicker :)

          September 7, 2011 @ 4:43 pm
      • Dave,

        The nodes you are talking about are older nodes and nothing to do with this current sale.



        September 7, 2011 @ 4:56 pm
    • As said if everyone keeps running these tests your I/O is just going to stay bad. Yesterday it was in the 100’s. Everyone running the test is doing it to yourself, and also all the torrenting is a big cause as we have suspended over 10 people for breaking the rules. Everyone is taking advantage of the offer and there is nothing we can do if everyone wants to keep running test and torrenting.



      September 7, 2011 @ 4:53 pm
  76. jayzerbeam:

    I tried ordering for 3 months but the coupon code wouldn’t work. Is the $7/mo for the first month only? or for the lifetime of the account?

    September 7, 2011 @ 6:05 pm
    • Adam:

      You should try reading some of the comments…

      It’s on a month to month basis and it’s $7 per month for account lifetime.

      September 7, 2011 @ 6:24 pm
  77. Is CentOS 6 an option?

    September 7, 2011 @ 7:20 pm
  78. [root@robin ~]# wget -O /dev/null cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
    --2011-09-07 23:29:20--  http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
    Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net...
    Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net||:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream]
    Saving to: “/dev/null”
    100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 9.72M/s   in 9.4s    
    2011-09-07 23:29:29 (10.7 MB/s) - “/dev/null” saved [104857600/104857600]
    [root@robin ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 8.15707 s, 132 MB/s
    September 7, 2011 @ 7:35 pm
  79. WNBG:

    Both Chris and Jeremiah are hypocrites who say they allow torrenting till they sell you the service and suspend your VPS and giving no refund after selling it. Also network, hdds and cpus are piece of junk that’s why it’s that cheap, cheap as the staff.

    September 7, 2011 @ 7:53 pm
    • When you abuse your resources and cause 40 load, yes we will suspend you. People like you are the reason why users are seeing an I/O issue. Anyone will agree with me that it was the right thing to do.



      September 8, 2011 @ 1:38 pm
  80. thomas:

    The promotion code you entered has been applied to your cart but no items qualify for the discount yet – please check the promotion terms

    on enterprise with code!

    sad i would get a vps from you

    September 8, 2011 @ 3:47 am
    • I would try again as this code is still working.



      September 8, 2011 @ 1:35 pm
  81. MIYU-G:
    server ~ # dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 43.857 s, 24.5 MB/s
    server ~ # ls
    server ~ # dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 43.1907 s, 24.9 MB/s
    server ~ # dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 48.416 s, 22.2 MB/s
    server ~ # dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 20.351 s, 52.8 MB/s
    server ~ # dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 37.963 s, 28.3 MB/s
    server ~ # dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 37.1624 s, 28.9 MB/s

    The disk io looks worse and worse,I just bought yesterday,the iso was about 75MB/s yesterday.I’m on node 20

    September 8, 2011 @ 7:55 am
  82. Ricky:

    “yum update” is a nightmare..
    download speed is fast 8MB/s
    but it takes >5 minutes for the VPS to resolve the dependency….

    i am still waiting for it to finish (5/160)
    it takes one minute for one update, ouch.

    I hopes not all people is running some benchmark all at once..
    Disk IO is 38MB/s btw.

    September 8, 2011 @ 10:00 am
    • Ricky:

      Same node 20 here.

      September 8, 2011 @ 10:21 am
    • Ricky:

      yum update completed in 30 minutes finally. It got speeded up.

      September 8, 2011 @ 11:25 am
      • Meester Sneeky:

        You might want to check what mirrors your OS template uses. I know that for instance the Debian 6 template uses German mirrors.

        September 8, 2011 @ 1:21 pm
        • Ricky:

          Um… as i mentioned the download speed is OKAY (@8.1MB/s)
          The bottleneck is at the installing part. In my previous VPS @DS, yum update finished within 5 minutes (same amount of packages)

          September 8, 2011 @ 1:41 pm
  83. Ricky:

    mem_alloc error! with java 1G Ram argument. My VPS is running NOTHING else. Any idea?

    java.io.IOException: Cannot run program "sh": java.io.IOException: error=12, Cannot allocate memory
    	at java.lang.ProcessBuilder.start(ProcessBuilder.java:475)
    	at java.lang.Runtime.exec(Runtime.java:610)
    	at java.lang.Runtime.exec(Runtime.java:483)
    	at jline.UnixTerminal.exec(UnixTerminal.java:297)
    	at jline.UnixTerminal.exec(UnixTerminal.java:282)
    	at jline.UnixTerminal.stty(UnixTerminal.java:273)
    	at jline.UnixTerminal.initializeTerminal(UnixTerminal.java:77)
    	at jline.Terminal.setupTerminal(Terminal.java:75)
    	at jline.Terminal.getTerminal(Terminal.java:26)
    	at jline.ConsoleReader.(ConsoleReader.java:191)
    	at jline.ConsoleReader.(ConsoleReader.java:186)
    	at jline.ConsoleReader.(ConsoleReader.java:174)
    	at net.minecraft.server.MinecraftServer.(MinecraftServer.java:72)
    	at net.minecraft.server.MinecraftServer.main(MinecraftServer.java:501)
    	at org.bukkit.craftbukkit.Main.main(Main.java:127)
    Caused by: java.io.IOException: java.io.IOException: error=12, Cannot allocate memory
    	at java.lang.UNIXProcess.(UNIXProcess.java:164)
    	at java.lang.ProcessImpl.start(ProcessImpl.java:81)
    	at java.lang.ProcessBuilder.start(ProcessBuilder.java:468)
    September 8, 2011 @ 11:21 am
    • Ricky:

      However, minecraft is running fine, just the mem_alloc error occur.

      September 8, 2011 @ 11:23 am
  84. Mem_alloc error basically means there’s not enough memory to run whatever your trying to run. So either your using it all or someone else is using the RAM you paid for, IE Overselling :P

    September 8, 2011 @ 11:29 am
    • Not overselling,

      I just checked and every node has a large amount of memory free.

      Thanks for the suggestions though.



      September 8, 2011 @ 1:33 pm
      • Ricky:

        Hopefully, becoz I did not get this error in another 2G VPS.
        Having burstram or not might be the difference. I use the same config in both scenarios.

        September 8, 2011 @ 1:43 pm
        • ab:

          1 – java is crap
          2 – minecraft server is crap
          3 – minecraft in general’s coding is crap

          you’re probably trying to allocate 300gb of ram or something equally inane, before it drops down.

          you try using -Xms -Xmx?

          September 8, 2011 @ 1:46 pm
        • Ricky:

          Both 1G.

          September 8, 2011 @ 1:59 pm
  85. Ricky:
    dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 15.9063 seconds, 67.5 MB/s

    Thing is getting better. It seems that many enthusiasts have stopped “ff”ing the server.

    September 9, 2011 @ 1:42 am
    • Ricky:

      Typo: “dd”

      September 9, 2011 @ 1:43 am
      • Dave:

        Don’t admit to the type. Claim you were inventing a new expletive specific to I/O subsystems.

        September 9, 2011 @ 8:42 am
  86. I love chicagovps been using them for 6 months now have only had one issue in six months

    I have used volumdrive and virpus witch both kill all java every 10 min so i moved to Chicago vps and would not leave unless they started to do the same

    I run 3 vps with them on the Professional package i run about 870 mb ram steady with no issue 24/7

    September 10, 2011 @ 2:29 am
    • bmarkovic:

      Java VMs handle memory with all the grace of a kitchen strainer handling water. Add tomcat and 2GB without swap will run out pretty quickly. So you can’t really blame them for killing off processes that ruin the fun for the rest of us.

      September 12, 2011 @ 7:09 pm
  87. yeah, thanks to their great work, my boxes all work well so far, very good connections to EU.

    September 10, 2011 @ 4:15 pm
  88. Its a great offer. I’ve been at programming, network administration long before Windows 95 hit the shelf and long before most people ever heard of the Interweb. I can spot a deal from a mile away. The offer is great. They are attentive to tickets raised. 2GB for 7/Mo with high-speed throughput. AWESOME! What is there to complain about. When it come to running Java applications one has to know how to set your memory limits. If you are even going to touch Java, 2GB is probably best. Its only $7/mo. with the promo. A WHOLE 1.5 more than the 1GB. Otherwise, better RTM regarding memory allocation. Also, if you are a super noob and dont know how to kill processes, running another Java process will probably throw memory related exceptions because the other instances are hogging memory. So learning to set Java memory restraints, learning to use ps -aux, learning to use the kill command might all be helpful. :)

    September 10, 2011 @ 6:26 pm
  89. doughnet:

    IO just keeps getting worse & worse

    root@chi:~# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 23.3001 s, 46.1 MB/s

    way oversold

    September 11, 2011 @ 4:14 pm
    • Tom:

      Way undersold.

      September 11, 2011 @ 5:41 pm
    • 46MB is perfectly acceptable

      September 11, 2011 @ 5:50 pm
    • Meester Sneeky:

      Here’s what I”m getting today on node 16, minutes after you posted yours…

      root@chicago:~# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
      16384+0 records in
      16384+0 records out
      1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 14.1748 s, 75.7 MB/s
      September 11, 2011 @ 5:54 pm
  90. [root@panther ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=16k count=64k conv=fdatasync
    65536+0 records in
    65536+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 22.7517 s, 47.2 MB/s

    While the dd result is decent, small file reads are pretty bad:

    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=1 time=71.8 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=2 time=396.9 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=3 time=138.0 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=4 time=14.9 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=5 time=145.5 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=6 time=179.2 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=7 time=101.0 ms
    September 11, 2011 @ 8:01 pm
    • Dave:

      dd isn’t a good benchmark for any application’s performance anyway, unless your application’s main task is reading a large block of data raw from a block device.

      September 11, 2011 @ 9:09 pm
      • Meester Sneeky:

        I agree. And I don’t know why I even participate in posting this benchmark…

        The best benchmark is to just test the applications you use, unless the application you’re using a VPS for is to run dd tests ;)

        September 11, 2011 @ 9:16 pm
      • tux:

        Your are wrong. It is very good benchmark for dd application performance.

        September 11, 2011 @ 9:58 pm
        • Dave:

          That is covered by “unless your application’s main task is reading a large block of data raw from a block device”…

          September 11, 2011 @ 10:13 pm
  91. Hello,

    Just wanted to let everyone know about our Facebook page, and we pick a random person every month for a free 2GB VPS for one month. This drawing happens once a month, and you can win more than once!

    See you there!



    September 13, 2011 @ 3:25 am
  92. Tom:

    So anyone running some java close to 2gb? how’s the I/O right now?

    September 15, 2011 @ 8:33 pm
    • stormykins:

      Only 1GB max, but here’s vzfree for memory usage:

                     Total       Used       Free
      Kernel:     2048.00M      3.91M   2044.09M
      Allocate:   2048.00M    915.50M   1132.50M (2048M Guaranteed)
      Commit:     2048.00M    372.80M   1675.20M (40.3% of Allocated)
      Swap:                     0.00M            (0.0% of Committed)

      Maybe I’ll make a 512MB tmpfs partition and see.

      IO seems fine, but I haven’t installed any kind of benchmarking tools. Seems more responsive than the AWS node I’m running with an EBS volume RAID array (yes, you read that right).

      September 15, 2011 @ 10:56 pm
  93. Miles:

    Hmm, I’m running into fork errors already. Only allocated around 300 meg. Not sure if the app has gone haywire of the VM can’t allocate any memory

    September 16, 2011 @ 12:16 pm
    • Dave:

      How much memory and how many file descriptors is each process using? You could be running into a number-of-processes limit rather than a memory allocation one. Is anything in /proc/userbeancounters near to a limit at the time the forks start failing? Also check the process level limits set by ulimit (see http://ss64.com/bash/ulimit.html) – it may be that your process has too many files open (“too many” being defined by the lesser of what OpenVZ has set and what the relevant ulimit is set to) so new file descriptors for stdin/out/err can’t be created for the new process.

      September 16, 2011 @ 3:47 pm
      • Miles:

        Strangely it’s a brand new instance running java. That’s it really. cant actually do anything at the moment due to a fork error.

        September 16, 2011 @ 5:24 pm
    • Tom:

      I was on that train at volumedrive, yeah fork errors will not let you start higher memory apps because node cant’ find any ram at all. Complete overselling beyond openvz limits, thanks guess i’ll be passing thing crap.

      September 17, 2011 @ 7:22 am
      • Miles:

        Yeah I’ve decided to just go for a refund. Fork errors off the bat isn’t worth the hassle. I’ll go back to the dedicateds for now.

        I do get the impression this is more a software/configuration error than a resource error.

        Some of you guys should consider checking out kimsufi and some of their deals. That’s like $20 for a dedicated box a month

        September 17, 2011 @ 12:18 pm
      • Tom,

        We do not offer crap, Miles is completely wrong and did not even really give us a chance to try and fix the problem as the node isn’t oversold really at all.

        In the ticket he opened I explained that I checked the node myself and had more than enough memory to go around so saying we oversold the machine is really wrong and you should not make accusations without actually being a client and testing it out for yourself. If you read the whole thread and reviewed the benchmarks you will see that our service is better than what most $7 offers give you.



        September 17, 2011 @ 4:05 pm
        • Miles:

          Woah, easy Chris I wasn’t suggesting your node was oversold at all.

          As I mentioned I suspected it was a configuration error and I really only wanted to try the service [after all the good comments] but I didn’t really want to wait more than a few hours for you guys to fix it. I’m sure you would have sorted it.

          This was nothing more than personal choice. Admittedly if it worked when I received it I wouldn’t have cancelled but my intention was only to have a play.

          September 17, 2011 @ 5:48 pm
  94.                Total       Used       Free
    Kernel:     2048.00M      6.95M   2041.05M
    Allocate:   2048.00M   1923.24M    124.76M (2048M Guaranteed)
    Commit:     2048.00M   1385.88M    662.12M (71.7% of Allocated)
    Swap:                    26.05M            (1.9% of Committed)

    A little swap usage right now.

    September 16, 2011 @ 6:11 pm
    • Dan:

      me too as well

                     Total       Used       Free
      Kernel:     2048.00M      2.01M   2045.99M
      Allocate:   2048.00M     17.52M   2030.48M (2048M Guaranteed)
      Commit:     2048.00M     12.23M   2035.77M (58.3% of Allocated)
      Swap:                     2.70M            (26.4% of Committed)
      September 19, 2011 @ 1:45 pm
  95. ioping /
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=1 time=189.5 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=2 time=268.0 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=3 time=488.6 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=4 time=564.6 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=5 time=93.9 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=6 time=127.9 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=7 time=139.0 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=8 time=196.7 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=9 time=45.9 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=10 time=87.4 ms
    --- / (simfs /dev/simfs) ioping statistics ---
    10 requests completed in 11818.3 ms, 5 iops, 0.0 mb/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 45.9/220.2/564.6/165.4 ms
    September 19, 2011 @ 4:01 am
    • Dan:

      damn, that latency is pretty bad. :(

      Heres mine, although not as bad as yours, its still pretty erratic.

      4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=1 time=19.9 ms
      4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=2 time=20.1 ms
      4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=3 time=62.0 ms
      4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=4 time=316.9 ms
      4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=5 time=600.7 ms
      4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=6 time=145.5 ms
      4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=7 time=122.0 ms
      4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=8 time=59.9 ms
      4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=9 time=11.9 ms
      4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=10 time=369.4 ms
      4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=11 time=80.9 ms
      4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=12 time=19.9 ms
      September 19, 2011 @ 1:44 pm
      • The mine is starting to degrade too.

        About 50MB/s in dd, but ioping is very bad.

        September 22, 2011 @ 12:43 am
        • Ricky:

          Same here, mediocre sequential IO speed and not-so-good random seek response.

          But, for a $7/month VPS with the 2GB you got, it is not crap service already. When you match this up with Directspace $7/month which you got half the RAM and more than double of down time, this price sounds reasonable.

          September 22, 2011 @ 7:40 am
        • Dan:

          its getting better, ioping is getting fast again. Definitely a great vps :)

          September 27, 2011 @ 2:04 am
        • Just to inform, after almost one month…

          $ ./ioping-0.6/ioping -c10 .
          4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=1 time=46.1 ms
          4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=2 time=137.8 ms
          4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=3 time=125.9 ms
          4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=4 time=339.0 ms
          4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=5 time=155.7 ms
          4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=6 time=283.9 ms
          4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=7 time=23.2 ms
          4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=8 time=350.5 ms
          4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=9 time=179.6 ms
          4096 bytes from . (simfs /dev/simfs): request=10 time=231.8 ms
          --- . (simfs /dev/simfs) ioping statistics ---
          10 requests completed in 10881.6 ms, 5 iops, 0.0 mb/s
          min/avg/max/mdev = 23.2/187.4/350.5/107.3 ms
          $ dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k conv=fdatasync count=10k; rm test
          10240+0 records in
          10240+0 records out
          671088640 bytes (671 MB) copied, 18.9916 s, 35.3 MB/s

          Getting sluggish again u_u

          October 3, 2011 @ 11:57 pm
        • You can keep posting these, and i hate to tell you, the more you do, the less i almost care. It also does not help with node abusers that i am personally working on removing.



          October 4, 2011 @ 12:01 am
  96. Craig:

    it’s a great offer tho…

    keep on with it,

    i just hope there are not too much oversell or something…

    September 26, 2011 @ 8:49 pm
  97. steven:

    seems that they are out of stock.. can you please put up more 2gb servers ?

    September 27, 2011 @ 12:21 pm
  98. Supposing I start with the 1Gb plan to try out the service first. Then when I am confident, can I upgrade to the 2Gb plan for 7usd?

    September 27, 2011 @ 2:20 pm
    • Dave:

      Offers like this are generally “new services only”, so I would suggest going for the 2Gb if you might need it and dropping the service altogether if you are not happy with the performance. If it takes you two months to get it tested and end up canceling you are only out an extra $3.

      September 28, 2011 @ 8:43 am
  99. Wayne:

    Any chance of adding more stock to this offer? Tried to order, but it shows out of stock.

    September 28, 2011 @ 1:51 pm
  100. mike:

    Any idea when you will be back in stock?

    September 28, 2011 @ 2:50 pm
  101. Everyone, please take 30 seconds out of your life to watch this 30 second clip that “Team 3” made for a class project. We host some of the classes stuff and would really like to help them out. Their grade depends on how many views they get! Thank you!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4QUy5PTbv0



    September 30, 2011 @ 1:54 am
  102. JTR:

    Out of stock? Damn! I *just* went to finally buy this, and it’s out of stock :(.

    October 1, 2011 @ 2:27 am
  103. Adam:

    Back in stock just as the promo code expires… sneaky sneaky.

    October 3, 2011 @ 5:31 am
  104. Good thing I didn’t manage to buy anything from them. If this is the way they do their business, it does not augur well for a serious long-term relationship.

    October 3, 2011 @ 9:57 am
    • Agree,

      Why would this in anyway make you think we are a bad business? Our sales run for one month. We were posted on the first, and then the coupon expired on the first, as we have sent another sale to be posted. There is nothing sneaky we are trying to do its just how it works. If in some way you think otherwise please explain so I can maybe make it betters o others do not think this.



      October 3, 2011 @ 3:57 pm
      • Adam:

        Running a special for a month is totally meaningless and arbitrary if you are ‘out of stock’ for most of it.

        If you run a special for a month, you should at least make an effort to let people buy it for that month, otherwise what is the point.

        October 4, 2011 @ 10:21 am
        • I would assume “while stocks last” is always the assumption on sales, no? If so, I can’t see why you should demand a provider to always honour the price.

          October 4, 2011 @ 10:26 am
        • Adam,

          The sale was up the whole month minus 4 days at the end of the month. Based on the amount of orders, I think its pretty impressive the efforts we gave to make sure the sale was up as long as possible. A lot had to be done to make sure it worked out that way and to say we did not give it any effort to have it up for a full month is false.



          October 4, 2011 @ 10:54 am
        • Ricky:

          Honestly, I found nothing wrong with this sales and actually the stocks DO last very long already, viewing the insane price of this plan. Stock still last at the tenth day of this campaign so I doubted if there is anything “sneaky”.
          It is only unfortunately for you to find out this offer at a very late time.

          October 5, 2011 @ 4:56 pm
  105. mike:

    @Aree you can’t blame them for raising the prices. I’m sure they filled the machines they wanted to fill.

    October 3, 2011 @ 3:17 pm
    • Dave:

      They aren’t even raising prices, just ending the special offer.

      Most special offers are on a “while stocks last” basis so this is hardly unusual.

      October 3, 2011 @ 4:05 pm
      • Spirit:

        Beside that they said (read above posts from 1st and 2nd September) that this is promo which they will run around one month. I don’t see anything “sneaky” here.

        October 3, 2011 @ 4:35 pm
  106. My sincere apologies. Now I see what I have misunderstood. I wish Chicagovps all the best and may your business be good for a long time to come.

    October 3, 2011 @ 5:23 pm
  107. Anyone interested in DirectAdmin we now support it :)



    October 12, 2011 @ 1:56 am
    • Chris,
      When will this plan be restocked?

      January 2, 2012 @ 8:20 am
      • Dave:

        This specific offer won’t restart. IIRC they’ve had other, slightly different, offers on since.

        January 2, 2012 @ 12:14 pm
  108. FX2:

    Is this offer expired ? :(

    October 28, 2011 @ 10:32 am
  109. Does anyone check this offer. I mean the promo code 2048 works again. The enterprise plan 2G is just $7/month.

    Please check,

    January 7, 2012 @ 6:16 am
    • Yes Jeremiah has just reactivated this offer again. Will re-post this later today…

      January 7, 2012 @ 7:00 am
      • Tom:

        Finally, was waiting for this offer to be back.

        January 7, 2012 @ 10:32 am
  110. Jeetu:

    Whats the port speed? Cannot find in the offer or on any other offer page on the website.


    January 9, 2012 @ 8:10 am
  111. JP:

    Earlier comment went into moderation.

    Q: Whats the port speed? Cannot find in the offer or on any other offer page on the website.


    January 9, 2012 @ 8:30 am
  112. Stephen:

    Is there any way to set up the server without having to supply a domain? I don’t have one in mind to use for it and will just access it by IP, but there doesn’t seem to be an option for that.

    January 11, 2012 @ 4:42 pm
    • Stephen:

      bleh, replied in the wrong thread.

      January 11, 2012 @ 4:59 pm
  113. Paul Kennedy:

    Jeremiah and Chris have been nothing but fantastic for their servers. Great product and very friendly people to work with! I’ve been using their Enterprise Box for the last three months and have had zero issues. ChicagoVPS is definitely my first stop when getting a new VPS server…about to get me a second one, just for the fun of it. Highly recommended products and company.

    April 27, 2012 @ 8:29 am
  114. Alex:

    So.. Is the $7 forever or just the first month?

    April 28, 2012 @ 3:47 pm
  115. I have learn a few excellent stuff here. Definitely value bookmarking for revisiting. I surprise how so much attempt you place to make this sort of wonderful informative web site.

    January 31, 2013 @ 12:38 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.