LowEndBox - Cheap VPS, Hosting and Dedicated Server Deals

InceptionHosting – €4.50 256MB Xen VPS in Netherlands

Tags: , , Date/Time: August 10, 2011 @ 12:43 pm, by LowEndAdmin

InceptionHosting Another offer from Anthony at Inception Hosting. Now this is the new idea he is trying to plant (which he actually mentioned before). Coupon code 50lite gives you 50% off recurring discount on their “VPS Lite” plan. That’s €4.50/month after the discount (~USD$6.46), and here is the sign up link. You’ll get

  • 256MB memory
  • 15GB storage
  • 150GB/month data transfer on 1Gbps
  • IPv4 + IPv6
  • Xen/SolusVM

Only payment method is PayPal. Servers in Netherlands (test IPv4: 89.207.135.55, IPv6: 2a00:7b80:483:2::9a3f:95bd). Domain registered in December 2010 and they are incorporated in UK. Comprehensive review can be found at 96MB.com.

The original owner of LowEndBox known as "LowEndAdmin" or "LEA" for short founded LowEndBox in 2008 and created the concept of hosting applications on low resource "Low End Boxes". After creating the roots of the community that we know today, "LEA" stepped aside and allowed others to carry the torch forward.

54 Comments

  1. SwordfishBE:

    I can only recommend these guys.

    August 10, 2011 @ 1:49 pm | Reply
  2. KLIKLI:

    Well when LEB started to link to other similaric sites :P

    August 10, 2011 @ 4:00 pm | Reply
    • @KLIKLI: Just want to say 96MB.com and LEB are not exactly similar, LEB focuses more on the low end VPS deals and 96MB focuses more on the reviews. Having said that, 96MB was inspired by LEB (yes, I am a fan of Lowendbox.com and basically browse through this site daily for good deals before I decide to set up 96MB) and received a lot of help from LEA when setting the site up, for which I definitely need to thank LEA for it. Thanks LEA!

      August 10, 2011 @ 10:32 pm | Reply
    • @KLIKLI — if it is useful, why not? :)

      For the past 4 years I did see a lot of other low end VPS-related sites springing up around the Internet, and it has been nice to have a small hosting community growing out from this niche (except maybe all those scrappers :)

      August 10, 2011 @ 11:44 pm | Reply
      • Indeed, I think the people who spend their own time creating these sites have really helped the industry, Its a daily thing now to see people on WHT instead of making recommendations simply saying “take a look on lowendbox or 96mb” myself included when people are looking for a VPS on a budget.

        I think its time some of the hosts featured here chipped in for a Christmas present for these guys :)

        August 10, 2011 @ 11:56 pm | Reply
      • Thanks LEA for the encouragement!

        August 11, 2011 @ 1:30 am | Reply
  3. There is also a Double RAM ‘or’ Double Bandwidth offer on right now that can be used together with the offer LEA has kindly posted.

    If there are any takers on this offer please open a ticket with your choice of upgrade and it will be applied within 24 hours (Most likely allot sooner).

    August 10, 2011 @ 6:29 pm | Reply
    • Sorry….long day… last post should have said Double HDD ‘or’ Double Bandwidth but I suppose as the offer has been made it will be honoured for those that sign up from LEB.

      August 10, 2011 @ 6:35 pm | Reply
      • The double RAM was a typo but I will keep it valid for the next 48 hours from the time of this post.

        August 16, 2011 @ 5:18 pm | Reply
  4. At risk of spamming… just though I should add, MoneyBookers is now also available for payment.

    August 10, 2011 @ 6:56 pm | Reply
  5. Gary:

    Awesome offer on the website.

    “That’s 1024MB RAM, 80GB Raid 10 HDD Space and 400GB of RAM for just 9.99!”

    August 10, 2011 @ 10:14 pm | Reply
  6. Thanks Gary,

    Obviously I could not post that here with it being over $7 :)

    August 10, 2011 @ 10:15 pm | Reply
    • Gary:

      True, but even at a tenner, 400GB of ram is a good deal.

      August 10, 2011 @ 10:16 pm | Reply
    • And obvious typo corrected, my brain is obviously disconnected from my fingers today! :)

      August 10, 2011 @ 10:17 pm | Reply
      • Gary:

        I’m like that most days, I wouldn’t worry about it.

        August 10, 2011 @ 10:18 pm | Reply
      • Wow, I was gonna say is it even possible to have a 400GB RAM VPS? Well, I guess it must be possible technically but unless Anthony want to put himself in deadpool tomorrow, I would strong recommend against doing that! :)

        August 10, 2011 @ 10:50 pm | Reply
  7. Haha… sorry my fingers have been mixing up HDD and RAM and Bandwidth all day (Not in any service affecting way)

    I blame staff interviews today they always make me go a little brain dead!

    August 10, 2011 @ 11:01 pm | Reply
  8. Thomas:

    Too bad IRC isn’t allowed :\

    August 11, 2011 @ 1:05 am | Reply
  9. Danio:

    No IRC, no audio/video streaming, no adult content, no offering files for download larger than 50MB, no obscene speech or material, no defamatory or abusive language, no “Exporting encryption software over the Internet or otherwise, to points outside the United States.” (?)

    August 12, 2011 @ 12:20 pm | Reply
    • Thank you Danio,

      TOS/AUP have been updated and some of the irrelevant and draconian elements removed and other terms updated.

      For clarity:
      -IRC is allowed for private use, connections to public networks are not.
      -Audio/Video Streaming terms have been updated and are allowed with certain restrictions
      -Legal Adult Is allowed
      -File download limit changed to 1000MB but in reality is is not imposed it is simply for protection from abuse.

      TOS/AUP are never nice to read however they have to be over aggressive simply for the protection of the business, I agree some of the old terms were perhaps a step to far.

      The legal template was a purchased one and obviously have some irrelevant elements that were missed.

      Hope that clears things up for you if not feel free to email me inbox@inceptionhosting.com or post a reply here.

      August 12, 2011 @ 3:45 pm | Reply
      • Gary:

        If the file limit isn’t imposed, why mention it?

        What kind of abuse could the service be subjected to if it’s a 1000MB file, that wouldn’t occur if it was 2 500MB files?

        August 12, 2011 @ 4:00 pm | Reply
        • Got to love lowendbox for feedback :) (That is genuine)

          The thinking behind it was mainly based around an extra deterrent for hosting copyright material such as films/dvd’s/games etc however to pre-empt the next comment, I know that is already broadly covered elsewhere and copyright material can be any size.

          I will remove the file size limitation on the next update of the TOS.

          Thanks again for your feedback.

          Anthony.

          August 12, 2011 @ 4:08 pm | Reply
        • Gary:

          Good to see a host that’s willing to listen and see reason. :)

          August 12, 2011 @ 4:11 pm | Reply
        • Ok That has been updated now.

          August 12, 2011 @ 6:02 pm | Reply
        • Danio:

          Indeed Gary, I’m very pleased that they would be willing to ease up on the AUP. Definitely considering ordering a VPS!

          August 12, 2011 @ 7:44 pm | Reply
        • Quick update, TOS+AUP gone through again this morning, hopefully a lot more customer friendly now but as always happy to take feedback.

          August 15, 2011 @ 12:33 pm | Reply
  10. And that’s all Folks, all stock sold out, based on the sales volumes over the last 48 hours (Which has been amazing thank you) new hardware was ordered and new nodes will be ready in the next 24 – 48 hours.

    I will keep everyone posted when a more accurate ETA is available.

    August 12, 2011 @ 10:54 pm | Reply
  11. More stock available in 1 – 2 hours.

    August 13, 2011 @ 5:32 pm | Reply
  12. Christian:

    They had some heavy DDoS attacks for about a month. But after this their performance was really good. If you want a really good european XEN box for a fair price this is defenitely one.

    August 13, 2011 @ 7:07 pm | Reply
  13. *Cough* New stock added :) *Cough*

    August 13, 2011 @ 7:50 pm | Reply
  14. May we still use “50lite” and Anthony Smith’s “Double RAM” together while ordering from this new batch?

    August 16, 2011 @ 11:18 am | Reply
    • Hi Mark,

      It was a typo but yes I will keep that valid for the next 48 hours. :)

      Anthony.

      August 16, 2011 @ 5:17 pm | Reply
  15. Thank you Anthony,

    I just bought one.
    Tested the support (with a common bug). The response was fast, professional and precise.
    Tested the machine and it seems fast and with plenty of resources (CPU, inodes, etc).
    The ping times are very good too.

    So far… it seems to good to be true!

    August 16, 2011 @ 11:42 pm | Reply
    • Thanks for your comment Mark,

      Nice test, to be honest I had not seen that bug (Which I have now reported) so no doubt I will get slapped in the face by SolusLabs telling me to RTFM :)

      Hope you enjoy your service.

      Anthony.

      August 16, 2011 @ 11:49 pm | Reply
  16. Hello, I’d like to share my experience with you. I’m running a daily-news site which has 150k Alexa rank (check my website link above). My site use MySQL heavily so I look for a powerful VPS with good I/O. I look at many providers until I get 96mb’s review about Inception Hosting. Unixbench is very high. I also read other comments in LEB. Overall positive comments. Then I read Inception Hosting’s offer thread in WHT, very impressive to me. But their current plans do not fit my need so I email them about custom plan. They response fast and friendly. Finally, I get my VPS: Xen/50GB storage/650GB bandwidth/8 full cores i7 950 @ 3.07GHz/1Gbps uplink port. It costs only €12.50EUR (after discount). Of course, this is not a low-end box, it’s high-end. I test carefully all aspects: true 1Gbps uplink port, constant 170MB/s I/O speed, 1995 Unixbench score. I’m totally happy with this VPS ^_^

    But at the time of writing this, I also request cancellation of my VPS. Why? Because I live in Southeast Asia and most visitors of my site live there too. After some days I realize that the connection from Inception Hosting Data Center to my country is not stable. Sometime I get a high speed sometime low. I know that this is not Inception Hosting’s fault. This is a problem of geographical distance. I placed an order on 14/Aug and 15/Aug Inception Hosting posted a test file in WHT. I wish they did provide it sooner :)

    In short: Highly recommend! (Be sure to use the test file before place an order :)

    My real benchmarks:

    
       BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.3)
    
       System: tdc: GNU/Linux
       OS: GNU/Linux -- 2.6.18-238.19.1.el5xen -- #1 SMP Fri Jul 15 08:16:59 EDT 2011
       Machine: x86_64 (x86_64)
       Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="UTF-8", collate="UTF-8")
       CPU 0: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz (7668.4 bogomips)
              Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET
       CPU 1: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz (7668.4 bogomips)
              Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET
       CPU 2: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz (7668.4 bogomips)
              Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET
       CPU 3: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz (7668.4 bogomips)
              Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET
       CPU 4: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz (7668.4 bogomips)
              Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET
       CPU 5: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz (7668.4 bogomips)
              Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET
       CPU 6: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz (7668.4 bogomips)
              Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET
       CPU 7: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz (7668.4 bogomips)
              Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET
       05:03:58 up 1 day, 11:43,  1 user,  load average: 0.10, 0.06, 0.02; runlevel 3
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Benchmark Run: Tue Aug 16 2011 05:03:58 - 05:32:09
    8 CPUs in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests
    
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables       17734208.5 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Double-Precision Whetstone                     3500.1 MWIPS (9.9 s, 7 samples)
    Execl Throughput                               1803.9 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks        353968.4 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks           93264.7 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks       1015641.1 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    Pipe Throughput                              524402.8 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Pipe-based Context Switching                 114029.4 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Process Creation                               4611.0 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                   4991.1 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                   1640.4 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
    System Call Overhead                         607067.3 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    
    System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0   17734208.5   1519.6
    Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0       3500.1    636.4
    Execl Throughput                                 43.0       1803.9    419.5
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0     353968.4    893.9
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0      93264.7    563.5
    File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0    1015641.1   1751.1
    Pipe Throughput                               12440.0     524402.8    421.5
    Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0     114029.4    285.1
    Process Creation                                126.0       4611.0    366.0
    Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4       4991.1   1177.1
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0       1640.4   2734.0
    System Call Overhead                          15000.0     607067.3    404.7
                                                                       ========
    System Benchmarks Index Score                                         723.3
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Benchmark Run: Tue Aug 16 2011 05:32:09 - 06:00:53
    8 CPUs in system; running 8 parallel copies of tests
    
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables       66598094.7 lps   (10.1 s, 7 samples)
    Double-Precision Whetstone                    22626.2 MWIPS (9.9 s, 7 samples)
    Execl Throughput                               9519.6 lps   (29.9 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks        224418.5 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks           59565.4 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks        757747.3 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    Pipe Throughput                             2889242.2 lps   (10.1 s, 7 samples)
    Pipe-based Context Switching                 754281.8 lps   (10.1 s, 7 samples)
    Process Creation                              20912.7 lps   (30.1 s, 2 samples)
    Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                  16510.9 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                   2584.3 lpm   (60.1 s, 2 samples)
    System Call Overhead                        3536827.9 lps   (10.1 s, 7 samples)
    
    System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0   66598094.7   5706.8
    Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0      22626.2   4113.9
    Execl Throughput                                 43.0       9519.6   2213.9
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0     224418.5    566.7
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0      59565.4    359.9
    File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0     757747.3   1306.5
    Pipe Throughput                               12440.0    2889242.2   2322.5
    Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0     754281.8   1885.7
    Process Creation                                126.0      20912.7   1659.7
    Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4      16510.9   3894.1
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0       2584.3   4307.2
    System Call Overhead                          15000.0    3536827.9   2357.9
                                                                       ========
    System Benchmarks Index Score                                        1995.3
    
    #dd if=/dev/zero of=test.bin bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm -f test.bin
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 6.27865 seconds, 171 MB/s
    
    dd if=/dev/zero of=test.bin bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm -f test.bin
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 6.52427 seconds, 165 MB/s
    

    Downlink speed from The Netherlands (LeaseWeb):

    wget -O /dev/null http://mirror.leaseweb.com/speedtest/1000mb.bin  --2011-08-17 00:43:38--  http://mirror.leaseweb.com/speedtest/1000mb.bin
    Resolving mirror.leaseweb.com... 94.75.223.121, 2001:1af8:4030:1:0:dead:beef:cafe
    Connecting to mirror.leaseweb.com|94.75.223.121|:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 1000000000 (954M) [application/octet-stream]
    Saving to: `/dev/null'
    
    100%[====================================>] 1,000,000,000 41.0M/s   in 18s
    
    2011-08-17 00:43:56 (52.6 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [1000000000/1000000000]
    

    Downlink speed from United States (LeaseWeb):

    wget -O /dev/null http://108.59.15.1/100mb.bin
    --2011-08-17 00:48:02--  http://108.59.15.1/100mb.bin
    Connecting to 108.59.15.1:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream]
    Saving to: `/dev/null'
    
    100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 25.3M/s   in 5.5s
    
    2011-08-17 00:48:08 (18.2 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
    

    Downlink speed from Germany (LeaseWeb):

    wget -O /dev/null http://mirror.de.leaseweb.net/speedtest/100mb.bin--2011-08-17 00:49:13--  http://mirror.de.leaseweb.net/speedtest/100mb.bin
    Resolving mirror.de.leaseweb.net... 46.165.198.1, 2a00:c98:2010:1:1:face:d06:f00d
    Connecting to mirror.de.leaseweb.net|46.165.198.1|:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 100000000 (95M) [application/octet-stream]
    Saving to: `/dev/null'
    
    100%[======================================>] 100,000,000 18.6M/s   in 8.0s
    
    2011-08-17 00:49:21 (11.9 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [100000000/100000000]
    

    Uplink speed from PhoenixNap (Quickweb 1Gbps):

    wget 89.207.130.101/t.bin -O /dev/null
    --2011-08-17 08:31:39--  http://89.207.130.101/t.bin
    Connecting to 89.207.130.101:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 536870912 (512M) [application/octet-stream]
    Saving to: `/dev/null'
    
    100%[======================================>] 536,870,912 1.36M/s   in 14m 4s
    
    2011-08-17 08:45:44 (621 KB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [536870912/536870912]
    

    Uplink speed from Los Angeles (Kiloserve 1Gbps):

    wget 89.207.130.101/t.bin -O /dev/null
    --2011-08-17 11:55:24--  http://89.207.130.101/t.bin
    Connecting to 89.207.130.101:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 536870912 (512M) [application/octet-stream]
    Saving to: `/dev/null'
    
    100%[======================================>] 536,870,912 1.94M/s   in 6m 1s
    
    2011-08-17 12:01:26 (1.42 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [536870912/536870912]
    
    August 17, 2011 @ 5:23 am | Reply
    • Oops, I have a mistake. I means downlink when I say “true 1Gbps uplink port”. I don’t have VPS in EU so I can’t verify that it’s “true 1Gbps uplink port”.

      August 17, 2011 @ 5:41 am | Reply
      • Thanks for the comments Alex,

        Sorry it did not work out for you, I don’t actually know of any hosts in your part of the world.

        Anthony.

        August 17, 2011 @ 11:46 am | Reply
    • Daniel:

      How much RAM was that deal for 12.50?

      January 2, 2012 @ 11:05 am | Reply
      • From memory it was a 768 MB plan or it may have been a 1GB with a tiny disk allocation.

        Once the new hardware is in place in the Netherlands (By FEB I hope) The current Netherlands packages will be classified as legacy and no longer be available and instead it is likely to move over to less cores but more ram for your money.

        Still being planned though but if you take a look here http://inceptionhosting.com/usa-xen-vps/ the new Netherlands offers are likely to be under a similar price structure. :)

        Anthony.

        January 2, 2012 @ 4:29 pm | Reply
        • Daniel:

          Thanks for your information Anthony!

          Would it still be possible to buy low-end boxes (less then 256mb ram) or will the legacy plans be on sale?
          And would more CPU cores be an option if needed?

          January 3, 2012 @ 11:11 am | Reply
        • Hi Daniel,

          I might put a 128 plan out here only probably similar to what went out not so long ago for 6 euros p/quarter.

          Regarding the CPU Cores, please don’t take this the wrong way but why would you possibly need access to more than 4 cores on such a low spec VPS?

          That is a genuine question I have had a few emails asking for a 128 / 8 core plan for the new USA servers too and it puzzles me, the only use I can think of for them is to show off your geekbench scores :), anyone on a 128 plan that constantly uses 8 cores is asking for trouble in a shared resource environment.

          January 3, 2012 @ 3:47 pm | Reply
  17. If you are looking a more up-to-date review on Inception Hosting, I have just done one here:
    http://www.96mb.com/96mb-low-end-vps-review-part-xxi-inception-hosting-revisited/

    August 17, 2011 @ 2:35 pm | Reply
    • Thanks 96MB,

      Your input as usual is very valuable, well written review too :)

      Anthony.

      August 17, 2011 @ 4:06 pm | Reply
  18. Bandwidth / transfer upgraded on all packages, the one in this offer now comes with 300GB as standard anyone that has already bought this is welcome to open a ticket if they want the free upgrade :)

    Added bonus for the VPS lite bought through lowendbox, FREE 25% RAM upgrade to 320MB, open a ticket after purchase for the free upgrade

    August 26, 2011 @ 5:26 pm | Reply
  19. New templates have been added.

    CentOS 5 + OpenVPN AS
    CentOS 6
    Ubuntu 11.04
    Ubuntu 10.10 + ISPConfig 3

    September 11, 2011 @ 3:21 pm | Reply
  20. EnFo:

    Would you consider doing a deal on your xenVPSsuperultra package?
    No harm in asking I guess :D

    September 11, 2011 @ 4:33 pm | Reply
  21. Tim:

    Does Inception still have any deals right now

    September 17, 2011 @ 1:39 pm | Reply
  22. Hi Tim,

    Indeed,
    ’50offlife’ will get you a 50% discount for the life of your order on any package with 256MB+ (excludes 8GB and 2GB RAM Plans)

    ’50off1st’ will get you 50% off your first month for ANY VPS package available on the site.

    And then there is the one mentioned on the top of this post.

    Anthony.

    September 17, 2011 @ 2:28 pm | Reply
  23. Boris:

    Bought one 2 weeks ago – really nice VPS with great support

    October 2, 2011 @ 8:55 am | Reply
  24. paul:

    Very nice box so far. Here are some “openssl speed rsa1024 multi n” timings where n=1,2,3…10 (runs that many parallel openssl threads). 4 is repeated because I ran that test twice:

    OpenSSL 0.9.8o 01 Jun 2010
    built on: Thu Feb 10 20:02:37 UTC 2011
    options:bn(64,32) md2(int) rc4(idx,int) des(ptr,risc1,16,long) aes(partial) blowfish(idx) 
    compiler: gcc -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC -DZLIB -DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -DL_ENDIAN -DTERMIO -O3 -march=i686 -Wa,--noexecstack -g -Wall -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_PART_WORDS -DOPENSSL_IA32_SSE2 -DSHA1_ASM -DMD5_ASM -DRMD160_ASM -DAES_ASM
    available timing options: TIMES TIMEB HZ=100 [sysconf value]
    timing function used: 
    
                          sign    verify    sign/s verify/s
    
     1: rsa 1024 bits 0.002706s 0.000112s    369.5   8927.3
     2: rsa 1024 bits 0.001198s 0.000048s    834.4  20618.6
     3: rsa 1024 bits 0.000664s 0.000027s   1505.6  36585.4
     4: rsa 1024 bits 0.000451s 0.000020s   2216.9  50474.7
     4: rsa 1024 bits 0.000462s 0.000019s   2165.4  51781.6
     5: rsa 1024 bits 0.000391s 0.000018s   2554.6  57082.4
     6: rsa 1024 bits 0.000361s 0.000015s   2771.9  65220.0
     7: rsa 1024 bits 0.000340s 0.000015s   2940.6  68922.5
     8: rsa 1024 bits 0.000355s 0.000014s   2819.9  69653.3
     9: rsa 1024 bits 0.000334s 0.000014s   2994.8  70775.3
    10: rsa 1024 bits 0.000335s 0.000015s   2988.8  68814.6
    

    You see there is only a slight speedup after 4 threads; what’s happening here (I’m pretty sure) is that while 8 “cores” are visible, it’s actually a 4 core i7 processor with hyperthreading. Still very nice to have that parallelism available in such a low cost plan. My other cheap plans give access to just 1 core.

    November 5, 2011 @ 7:27 am | Reply
    • paul:

      Wait, I posted in the wrong thread– I’m actually on the €3/quarter, 128MB plan announced a few week ago. That make the performance even more impressive ;)

      November 5, 2011 @ 8:04 am | Reply
  25. Just a quick update, a bit more stock has been added the code ‘leblitenov’ (in the newer post has been extended until 15th Jan.

    Anthony.

    January 3, 2012 @ 5:57 pm | 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 *