LowEndBox - Cheap VPS, Hosting and Dedicated Server Deals

Inception Hosting – XEN PV from $32/year in Phoenix & Netherlands

Tags: , , , , , , Date/Time: March 20, 2012 @ 9:54 pm, by Frank Williams

InceptionHostAnthony from Inceptionnnnnn Hosting is finally getting his offer posted. After multiple months of selling out before we got around to posting it, his XEN PV offer is finally getting up here :)

EUVPS128

  • 2 Cores Equal Share
  • 128MB Guaranteed RAM
  • 128MB SWAP
  • 7GB Disk (Raid 10)
  • 300GB Bandwidth on a Gbit port
  • 1 IPv4 & 5 IPv6 Addresses

$32.06/yearOrder NL

EUVPS256

  • 4 Cores Equal Share
  • 256MB Guaranteed RAM
  • 256MB SWAP
  • 15GB Disk (Raid 10)
  • 600GB Bandwidth on a Gbit port
  • 1 IPv4 & 5 IPv6 Addresses

$6.68/monthOrder NL

VPS512

  • 4 Cores Equal Share
  • 512MB Guaranteed RAM
  • 512MB SWAP
  • 25GB Disk (Raid 10)
  • 350GB Bandwidth on a 100mbit port
  • 1 IPv4 Address

$6.68/month (Coupon Code: LEB512MAR) – Order USA

Netherlands Test IP’s – 128.204.195.115 / 2a00:7b80:3019:12::2ef1:902e
Phoenix Test IP – 199.30.48.191

To spice up the deal some more, Anthony is now including 15GB of offsite backup space with every order.

Frank Williams is the pen-name for our offer review and publishing team. For questions or inquiries please contact our Help Desk.

64 Comments

  1. Jack:

    One of the best hosting companies on LEB!

    March 20, 2012 @ 10:02 pm | Reply
    • Thanks Jack :)

      March 20, 2012 @ 10:27 pm | Reply
    • Sorry folks, Just spotted an error on the offer, the USA servers are 100mbit not gbit.. #myfatfingers

      March 20, 2012 @ 10:46 pm | Reply
      • You’d think after you trying to get listed 3 – 4 times we would have worked all of the kinks out :P

        Fixed either way!

        March 20, 2012 @ 10:50 pm | Reply
        • Yep sorry Mark,

          My fault, I like the subtle references to ‘Inception’ the film too :)

          March 20, 2012 @ 10:52 pm | Reply
  2. Martin:

    I can’t get the coupon code to work on the USA VPS – and its showing up as €8.

    March 20, 2012 @ 10:13 pm | Reply
    • Martin:

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

      March 20, 2012 @ 10:20 pm | Reply
  3. I also can not get the coupon to work it says

    “The promotion code entered does not exist”

    March 20, 2012 @ 10:21 pm | Reply
  4. Sorry folks, use: LEB512MAR the code posted has expired due to the length of time the posting of this offer was stalled.

    Anthony.

    March 20, 2012 @ 10:24 pm | Reply
    • Martin:

      Thanks. But now I’m having a new problem. At the MaxMind phone verification, I entered the code and it doesn’t go further. :(

      March 20, 2012 @ 10:37 pm | Reply
      • Hi Martin,

        That’s because your IP is 7000 miles from the address you entered, if you correct your billing address or drop off the proxy/VPN if that s what you are using you should not have any maxmind issues.

        Anthony.

        March 20, 2012 @ 10:40 pm | Reply
        • “if that’s what your using”

          March 20, 2012 @ 10:41 pm | Reply
        • Martin:

          Thanks Anthony. :) It would be helpful if it gave some sort of error. ;)

          March 20, 2012 @ 10:41 pm | Reply
        • Could not agree more, Maxmind is good but can leave users with a “hu?” feeling, sorry about that, I was about to email you to let you know why but spotted this first.

          March 20, 2012 @ 10:43 pm | Reply
  5. I’m interested in a NL VPS to function primarily as a personal proxy so that I can access news and other content in the EU (BBC, etc) that is otherwise blocked or different for US users. The AUP says no streaming, which technically would apply to any news related videos that I’d watch. Does my described usage violate the TOS?

    March 20, 2012 @ 10:45 pm | Reply
    • Hi Manfre,

      That usage is fine as long as the proxy is private and not public.

      Anthony.

      March 20, 2012 @ 10:51 pm | Reply
  6. Dano:

    Ive had an Inception node in Phoenix for about 2 months or so now. I would have to say it’s been a pleasant experience, as the system has had very good uptime and responds pretty fast for it’s services. I was thinking that the slightly older Intel core would have been a bit slow, but with the 4 cores assigned to my 256 node, it runs very well. Connectivity to Asian Pacific and North America is pretty good also.

    March 20, 2012 @ 11:18 pm | Reply
    • Thanks Dano,

      At some point they will move over to E3-1240’s but to be honest those 3470’s are doing exceptionally well, I suppose that’s because they were pretty much at the top end of the last gen QC’s.

      March 20, 2012 @ 11:24 pm | Reply
  7. I have had a VPS with Inception for about 4 or 5 months. I must say, I still love it.

    March 21, 2012 @ 1:38 am | Reply
  8. Jon:

    I had Inception for about 4 months in NL. The bandwidth was great, but its CPU performance was the slowest I ever used in a VPS. When I ran my benchmark test using all 4 cores, it performed 5 times slower than my VPSs in the US and 2 times slower than my low-end VPSs in Moscow and Spain.

    March 21, 2012 @ 3:53 am | Reply
    • Hi Jon,

      Care to provide a ticket number?

      96mb.com if you want to see some actual evidence of our bench marks which are higher than most other LEB’s

      The only way that this is true is if you were doing something wrong and not getting the results you wanted as a result.

      The only Jon I am aware of that there has been any issues with is a person that cancelled stating that their own application would not use all 8 cores only 1, I fail to see how a problem with your own application can have any reflection on the actual VPS rather than your own lack of understanding.

      Is that you?

      March 21, 2012 @ 8:44 am | Reply
      • Jon:

        I sent a cancellation request with the details on
        Thu, 16 Feb 2012 02:02:42 GMT

        I ran a simple benchmark test by doing a kernel compile of a kernel downloaded from kernel.org, using a “time make -j4” of the kernel. I noticed even though I specified to use all 4 cores, the performance of using 4 cores was identical to the performance of using 1 core “time make”. Other VPSs I have it would take 20 to 40 min to compile, and my Atom D510 server compiled that kernel in 51 min. With my InceptionHosting Xen instance, it took 104min.

        It seemed the CentOS or the host machine while it saw 4 cores, only 1 was actually usable. I found another provider in NL that offered a good price, so I decided to cancel and switch. Maybe I was the only one with this problem, maybe my CentOS 6 64-bit install was different somehow, but I just didn’t have the time to troubleshoot it other than submitting a cancellation request with the details.

        One thing I did notice, even though I ran a compile or an application that should use all 4 cores, when I run a vmstat, I think I remembered the CPU idle times were around 50% or higher, but if all cores were usable, the cpu idle should have been around 0%. That’s what convinced me even though I was running 4 threads to the max, the CentOS never seemed to actually have full access to all 4 cores.

        I suggest others check the CPU benchmark of their instance to see if you can use all cores, if you care.

        March 21, 2012 @ 3:05 pm | Reply
        • Hi Jon,

          Indeed I do care, and I will bench a cent 6 64bit system today.

          It is quite possible however that if you abused the equal share or CPU time that your VPS could have been capped to a single core but you still would have seen 4 in your OS.

          I cant ever think of a situation a customer would not be informed of this though.

          If you did not have time to troubleshoot or even open a ticket to ask the question I understand but none of this is conclusive proof of anything and I don’t think it is appropriate to make claims of slow performance when there are so many variables none of which you seem to have pursued.

          I will run a unixbench test on a centos 6 64bit VPS today as I know that uses all cores, if there are any issues with the amount of cores I will investigate this, then find your order and refund anything you paid.

          March 21, 2012 @ 3:20 pm | Reply
        • Single Core:

             Benchmark Run: Wed Mar 21 2012 11:49:03 - 12:13:10
             4 CPUs in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests
          
             BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.3)
          
             System: test.for.jon: GNU/Linux
             OS: GNU/Linux -- 2.6.32-71.29.1.el6.x86_64 -- #1 SMP Mon Jun 27 19:49:27 BST 2011
             Machine: x86_64 (x86_64)
             Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="UTF-8", collate="UTF-8")
             CPU 0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz (6784.7 bogomips)
                    Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSCALL/SYSRET
             CPU 1: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz (6784.7 bogomips)
                    Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSCALL/SYSRET
             CPU 2: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz (6784.7 bogomips)
                    Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSCALL/SYSRET
             CPU 3: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz (6784.7 bogomips)
                    Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSCALL/SYSRET
             11:49:03 up 4 min,  1 user,  load average: 0.05, 0.04, 0.01; runlevel 3
          
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Benchmark Run: Wed Mar 21 2012 11:49:03 - 12:13:10
          4 CPUs in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests
          
          Dhrystone 2 using register variables       33496536.4 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          Double-Precision Whetstone                     3882.2 MWIPS (9.9 s, 7 samples)
          Execl Throughput                               1645.1 lps   (29.7 s, 2 samples)
          Pipe Throughput                              425126.7 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          Pipe-based Context Switching                  89056.6 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          Process Creation                               3439.4 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
          Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                   3652.8 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
          Shell Scripts (16 concurrent)                   544.2 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
          Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                   1015.9 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
          System Call Overhead                         581195.3 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          
          System Benchmarks Partial Index              BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
          Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0   33496536.4   2870.3
          Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0       3882.2    705.9
          Execl Throughput                                 43.0       1645.1    382.6
          Pipe Throughput                               12440.0     425126.7    341.7
          Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0      89056.6    222.6
          Process Creation                                126.0       3439.4    273.0
          Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4       3652.8    861.5
          Shell Scripts (16 concurrent)                     ---        544.2      ---
          Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0       1015.9   1693.1
          System Call Overhead                          15000.0     581195.3    387.5
                                                                             ========
          System Benchmarks Index Score (Partial Only)                          593.2
          
          

          All 4 Cores

          Benchmark Run: Wed Mar 21 2012 12:13:10 - 12:37:15
          4 CPUs in system; running 4 parallel copies of tests
          
          Dhrystone 2 using register variables      102984320.1 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          Double-Precision Whetstone                    14468.6 MWIPS (9.7 s, 7 samples)
          Execl Throughput                               5018.8 lps   (29.5 s, 2 samples)
          Pipe Throughput                             1529724.8 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          Pipe-based Context Switching                 298231.4 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          Process Creation                               9417.2 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
          Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                   8334.6 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
          Shell Scripts (16 concurrent)                   523.7 lpm   (60.2 s, 2 samples)
          Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                   1083.5 lpm   (60.1 s, 2 samples)
          System Call Overhead                        2004142.0 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          
          System Benchmarks Partial Index              BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
          Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0  102984320.1   8824.7
          Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0      14468.6   2630.7
          Execl Throughput                                 43.0       5018.8   1167.2
          Pipe Throughput                               12440.0    1529724.8   1229.7
          Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0     298231.4    745.6
          Process Creation                                126.0       9417.2    747.4
          Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4       8334.6   1965.7
          Shell Scripts (16 concurrent)                     ---        523.7      ---
          Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0       1083.5   1805.8
          System Call Overhead                          15000.0    2004142.0   1336.1
                                                                             ========
          System Benchmarks Index Score (Partial Only)                         1644.7
          
          

          During single threaded tests I monitored the output of XENTOP and it never went above 100% of a single core.

          During the multi-threaded tests I can confirm that the VPS was using between 358 – 400% of the allocated cores (100% representing a single core, 400% representing 100% of 4 cores)

          Screen-shots available on request.

          March 21, 2012 @ 4:45 pm | Reply
        • Jon:

          Great! I’m glad the issue I experienced was just me. My comment was not meant to attack but simply point out an issue I had, so that others may look out for it. When I said “if you care” in my above comment, I meant if “you” (customers) care. If I was running a VPN or a small website, I would not have cared. I did want a VPS that I could use a lot of CPU once in a while, and I chose to bail rather than open a ticket to troubleshoot. That’s not your fault, but I just want to relay this information in case anyone else noticed slow CPU in their VPS, then you all would have some of my data to help you troubleshoot.

          March 21, 2012 @ 7:45 pm | Reply
        • Thanks Jon,

          Sorry I had misunderstood in that case, but either way it was worth checking.

          Anthony.

          March 21, 2012 @ 8:21 pm | Reply
  9. Trololol! with “Inceptionnnnnn” hahaha!

    I have one of the 64MB packages. So far so good. It had some network issues the past days. But is a very stable box. I think I will start to use it for something good this week :D

    March 21, 2012 @ 4:30 am | Reply
    • ‘spinningtop’ as a tag as well :P

      I figured having a bit of fun wouldn’t hurt the post at all.

      March 21, 2012 @ 5:40 am | Reply
    • Yep the network issue was due to a hardware failure in the upstream network equipment, the DC has reacted by putting a plan in place to get a second network provider in place rather than the current 1 network multiple carriers, they will have multiple carriers and multiple networks for further redundancy.

      March 21, 2012 @ 8:46 am | Reply
  10. I registered an account
    but not buy VPS
    Then account is deleted

    March 21, 2012 @ 6:11 am | Reply
    • Hi UUVPS,

      That is normal, if no order is placed within 24 hours your account will be removed if it has no products.

      This is due to the amount of people who sign up just for the affiliate code who do not have any products, the affiliate plan is for current customers only.

      March 21, 2012 @ 8:49 am | Reply
  11. Spo0lsh:

    I have vps in NL DC and it is the best VPS hosting … Thanks Inception team :)

    March 21, 2012 @ 7:57 am | Reply
  12. Only 3 more slots available for USA/Phoenix, been a busy day :)

    March 21, 2012 @ 5:15 pm | Reply
  13. Also a happy customer of Inception Hosting, good quality vps, no complaints. Uptime is very good, better than at alienVPS. Anthony is also a nice guy, had some problems with software, he is very competent and helpfull.

    March 21, 2012 @ 7:52 pm | Reply
  14. USA/Phoenix has now officially sold out.

    There may be a few more slots available in the next few days due to pending cancellations so if anyone is interested use the contact form on the site or drop me a PM on LET.

    Still space in the Netherlands.

    Thanks.

    Anthony.

    March 21, 2012 @ 11:06 pm | Reply
    • Jack:

      Got there in the end then Ant ;)

      March 21, 2012 @ 11:17 pm | Reply
  15. Wira:

    Hello,

    Got both NL and US VPS on Inception.. Both are running super good compared with my other provider before..
    Good provider and very recomended one :)

    March 22, 2012 @ 12:51 am | Reply
  16. More stock added in Phoenix.

    NL stock is almost sold out, additional stock will be available on Monday/Tuesday.

    Anthony.

    March 23, 2012 @ 10:35 pm | Reply
  17. fjim:

    I’d like to do a custom install of FreeBSD 9.0, is that possible?

    March 24, 2012 @ 1:34 pm | Reply
    • Hi fjim,

      There is no freebsd available at this time, it is not supported by Solusvm+Xen PV

      You may be able to get this with a Xen HVM or KVM host.

      Anthony.

      March 25, 2012 @ 1:53 pm | Reply
  18. Wouter van Eekelen:

    Inception Hosting is awesome, went for a VPS in Phoenix and it was set up instantly. Price/performance ratio is through the roof and 100% up.
    Unfortunately no IPv6 in Phoenix, but IPv6 in The Netherlands does work great and you can even set up RDNS through the panel too which is amazing! :)

    March 24, 2012 @ 3:39 pm | Reply
  19. Netherlands now has 1 x 128 slot left, new stock will be added Tuesday night/Wednesday morning.

    March 24, 2012 @ 7:03 pm | Reply
  20. More stock available in the Netherlands.

    Thanks.

    Anthony.

    March 27, 2012 @ 11:28 pm | Reply
  21. jal:

    if only u guys accept IRC..
    :(

    March 28, 2012 @ 6:26 am | Reply
  22. James:

    Small typo while ordering, but nothing much:

    “10 GB HDD Space – _!0_ GB of extra HDD space (€3.00EUR Monthly)”

    So far so good.

    March 29, 2012 @ 11:54 pm | Reply
  23. Borja:

    I am very happy with Inception Hosting, its the best I ever was. I’ve got the Netherlands XEN server and it run faster, and the connection speed its unbeatble.

    April 1, 2012 @ 7:44 am | Reply
  24. Borja:

    Just forged to say that i am with Inception Hosting since 17/10/2011

    April 1, 2012 @ 7:47 am | Reply
  25. Joao:

    Hi,

    When it will be more stock for Phoenix VPS512? Is there any package like that into NL?

    Tks

    April 3, 2012 @ 12:22 am | Reply
  26. My little review about them:

    http://www.96mb.com/96mb-low-end-vps-review-part-46-inception-hosting-take-three/

    I know Inception has received too many good remarks, but once again (at the risk of making everyone bored) I just want to say that the VPS they have is indeed great and totally worth the price.

    April 7, 2012 @ 4:25 am | Reply
  27. Makoto Koshiishi:

    Got banned when trying to edit my phone number…. What the hell. Then tells me the ban reason was for “Orders” ????

    April 10, 2012 @ 11:46 pm | Reply
    • Hi Makoto,

      Your order/IP was blocked under suspicion of fraud:

      It is unusual to see an IP 9000 miles from the address, the address which was both, Bangladesh and Netherlands while using an IP in Japan.

      Anthony.

      April 11, 2012 @ 10:29 am | Reply
  28. More stock in Phoenix coming in around 7 days.

    Offer will be extended when the new stock is available.

    Anthony.

    April 11, 2012 @ 12:04 am | Reply
  29. Stock added in Phoenix USA faster than expected.

    Same offer as above applies with a new LEB package too.

    Phoenix USA
    2 Cores Equal Share
    128mb Ram
    128mb Swap
    7GB HDD
    150 GB p/month (un-metered inbound)
    1 IP4
    15GB Offsite Backup Space on request

    €6.50 p/quater
    €12.00 Semi Annually
    €22.00 p/year

    LINK: https://inceptionhosting.com/clients/cart.php?a=add&pid=54

    April 11, 2012 @ 3:31 pm | Reply
    • Seems I set the monthly price to $0.00 on the 128 plan, which was immediately abused, sorted and IP bans in place.

      April 11, 2012 @ 3:43 pm | Reply
  30. David:

    Do you provide any sort of DDOS? How do you handle them?

    May 22, 2012 @ 10:58 pm | Reply
  31. mac:

    Hello,

    How about IPv6 @ Phoenix?

    March 1, 2013 @ 6:46 pm | Reply
  32. Sam:

    Been with Inception a few months now, easily the best VPS company I’ve ever dealt with. Recommended by a friend and very happy so far with both the service and support.

    May 14, 2013 @ 10:18 am | Reply
  33. Mikhail:

    hello

    Is Inception Hosting a hosting of 1 person?
    No telephone number, no any quick feedback..
    We can not get all day a password remind to login..

    November 11, 2013 @ 7:34 am | Reply

Leave a Reply

Some notes on commenting on LowEndBox:

  • Do not use LowEndBox for support issues. Go to your hosting provider and issue a ticket there. Coming here saying "my VPS is down, what do I do?!" will only have your comments removed.
  • Akismet is used for spam detection. Some comments may be held temporarily for manual approval.
  • Use <pre>...</pre> to quote the output from your terminal/console, or consider using a pastebin service.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *