LowEndBox - Cheap VPS, Hosting and Dedicated Server Deals

KiloServe – $5.25 512MB Xen VPS in Los Angeles

Tags: , , Date/Time: August 5, 2011 @ 1:47 pm, by LowEndAdmin

KiloServe KiloServe has certainly made my job easier by putting all their low end VPS plans under one single ordering page. Besides the 1GB OpenVZ VPS from last time that’s still available for purchase, they have also put in some low end Xen plans. Use promo code bb50 to get 50% off recurring discount on those Xen plans. “BBXenPV1” turns out to be $5.25/month after the discount. Direct sign up link here.

  • 512MB memory
  • 5GB storage
  • 150GB/month data transfer
  • Xen/SolusVM

Lots of payment options available — credit card, PayPal, Liberty Reserve, Moneybookers and AlertPay. They also have a 1GB Xen VPS for $83.96/year with promo code. Servers in Los Angeles/Pomona CA with iMountain. They have been in business for 4 years. KVM offers are also coming around September/December.

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. Tom:

    512MB of ram and only 5GB space? Surely they must use ballooning on such nodes.
    Overall really crappy offer for 5.25$ per month.

    August 5, 2011 @ 3:14 pm | Reply
    • I think you have us mistaken for some junk provider, Tom.

      No Ballooning.

      We always manage our disk space as a policy to ensure fast i/o. You won’t see us offering 100GB of disk space for $5 a month. Just not our budget box niche.

      KiloServe’s niche is high RAM and high disk I/O for a low price.

      This is 512MB XEN for only $5.25, if you want more diskspace, we have the 1GB XEN for $6.99 per month paid yearly.

      dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k 
      16384+0 records in
      16384+0 records out
      1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 1.44088 seconds, 745 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, 6.77116 seconds, 159 MB/s
      
      August 5, 2011 @ 4:25 pm | Reply
      • Flo:

        Right, KiloServe. i/o is much more important than a big hdd. And for some websites, it is more than enough.

        August 5, 2011 @ 5:16 pm | Reply
      • Flo:

        Maybe you have a test ip for us, to ping them?

        August 5, 2011 @ 5:21 pm | Reply
    • It really depends on what you are doing. Disk space has always been my lowest priority because of the sites I run. Honestly I haven’t used more than 5GB on any of my VPS except one used for backing up.

      But I guess if you are looking for VPS with large amount of disk space, this won’t be it.

      August 5, 2011 @ 10:38 pm | Reply
  2. Hi Flo

    Yes, some companies offer large disk space with reduced I/O

    We specialize in very high I/O, I don’t think there is a budget VPS provider with higher disk I/O than us.

    Here’s our test IP:

    74.62.152.52

    We use 12 or 16 disk RAID10 arrays on all of our newer Xen and VZ nodes. Disk space available on our Xen nodes is usually around 5 Terabytes…way more than is needed.

    If you are with us for 6 months+ and need more space, just ask and we will give you a free disk space upgrade.

    We have been providing quality VPS services for over 4 years, we don’t overload our nodes..there’s always plenty of CPU and I/O.

    August 5, 2011 @ 5:55 pm | Reply
    • Flo:

      Thanks very much. From my home (Germany) I get

      $ ping 74.62.152.52
      PING 74.62.152.52 (74.62.152.52) 56(84) bytes of data.
      64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=1 ttl=53 time=188 ms
      64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=2 ttl=53 time=188 ms
      64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=3 ttl=53 time=187 ms
      64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=4 ttl=53 time=188 ms

      Directly from DE-CIX I get

      $ ping 74.62.152.52
      PING 74.62.152.52 (74.62.152.52) 56(84) bytes of data.
      64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 time=166 ms
      64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=2 ttl=51 time=162 ms
      64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=3 ttl=51 time=166 ms
      64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=4 ttl=51 time=162 ms
      

      I think, for this high distance it is okay, especially the ping is very very stable, and than for this high distance!
      Maybe some other persons, who live in the usa, can give us a short information, because from me the distance is too high to get good results.

      August 5, 2011 @ 6:15 pm | Reply
      • Jim Snow:

        Hey

        well heres my two (ping) cents
        1. from La (webnx)

        root@la:~# ping root@la:~# ping 74.62.152.52
        PING 74.62.152.52 (74.62.152.52) 56(84) bytes of data.
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=1 ttl=53 time=15.2 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=2 ttl=53 time=11.3 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=3 ttl=53 time=11.3 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=4 ttl=53 time=11.3 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=5 ttl=53 time=11.3 ms
        

        2. Kansas,USA (?)

        root@kansas:~# ping 74.62.152.52
        PING 74.62.152.52 (74.62.152.52) 56(84) bytes of data.
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=1 ttl=45 time=55.9 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=2 ttl=45 time=55.7 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=3 ttl=45 time=55.5 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=4 ttl=45 time=55.6 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=5 ttl=45 time=55.6 ms
        

        3. Canada,Edmonton,AB (BUYVM)

        root@edmonton:~# ping 74.62.152.52
        PING 74.62.152.52 (74.62.152.52) 56(84) bytes of data.
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=1 ttl=50 time=13.7 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=2 ttl=50 time=13.7 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=3 ttl=50 time=13.9 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=4 ttl=50 time=13.6 ms
        

        4. Germany (Euserv)

        PING 74.62.152.52 (74.62.152.52) 56(84) bytes of data.
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=1 ttl=48 time=180 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=2 ttl=48 time=180 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=3 ttl=48 time=180 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=4 ttl=48 time=180 ms
        

        Yeah I have a Bunch of server…;)

        Hope This will help

        August 6, 2011 @ 2:29 am | Reply
      • paul:

        From buyvm (San Jose, California)

        $ ping 74.62.152.52
        PING 74.62.152.52 (74.62.152.52) 56(84) bytes of data.
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=1 ttl=52 time=11.9 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=2 ttl=52 time=11.7 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=3 ttl=52 time=11.9 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=4 ttl=52 time=13.0 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=5 ttl=52 time=11.8 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_req=6 ttl=52 time=11.7 ms
        

        From AlienVPS (Las Vegas, Nevada):

        $ ping 74.62.152.52
        PING 74.62.152.52 (74.62.152.52) 56(84) bytes of data.
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 time=21.1 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=2 ttl=51 time=21.1 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=3 ttl=51 time=21.1 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=4 ttl=51 time=21.1 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=5 ttl=51 time=21.2 ms
        

        From AlienVPS (New York):

        #ping 74.62.152.52
        PING 74.62.152.52 (74.62.152.52) 56(84) bytes of data.
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=1 ttl=49 time=76.9 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=2 ttl=49 time=76.5 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=3 ttl=49 time=76.5 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=4 ttl=49 time=76.5 ms
        64 bytes from 74.62.152.52: icmp_seq=5 ttl=49 time=76.5 ms
        

        That last is about the same as the ping time between the two Alien servers. There is a Cogentco bottleneck near LA somewhere, I think.

        October 22, 2011 @ 8:51 am | Reply
        • That is a good thing.

          If the ping between New York & California is about the same as New York to Nevada, it’s working right.

          California – New York is farther than Las Vegas to New York so the ping times should be longer, not shorter.

          October 23, 2011 @ 5:42 am | Reply
  3. beta4better:

    It seems really nice.

    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, 6.043 s, 178 MB/s
    
    
    wget -O /dev/null  http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
    --2011-08-06 01:11:36--  http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
    Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net... 205.234.175.175
    Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net|205.234.175.175|:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream]
    Saving to: `/dev/null'
    
    100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 55.7M/s   in 1.8s
    
    2011-08-06 01:11:38 (55.7 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
    
    
    August 6, 2011 @ 8:15 am | Reply
    • VPSFan:

      Thanks for posting the results from their Xen box. Those are pretty nice numbers.

      I got the “Kiloserve 1GB” OpenVZ plan back from the Low End Box deal a few months ago.

      My numbers from OpenVZ are slightly better than yours :)

      dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/output.img bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
      16384+0 records in
      16384+0 records out
      1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 4.27653 seconds, 251 MB/s
      

      But I might take up this one since it’s Xen and setup a VPN. Too bad they don’t have servers in Europe, I need some over there.

      August 6, 2011 @ 9:45 pm | Reply
    • VPSFan:

      Here’s cachefly test from their OpenVZ if anybody is interested. Good network speeds imho.

      wget -O /dev/null  http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
      --2011-08-06 15:47:45--  http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
      Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net... 205.234.175.175
      Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net|205.234.175.175|:80... connected.
      HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
      Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream]
      Saving to: `/dev/null'
      
      100%[=====================================>] 104,857,600 58.1M/s   in 1.7s   
      2011-08-06 15:47:47 (58.1 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
      
      August 6, 2011 @ 9:49 pm | Reply
      • Thankyou for posting your benchmarks of our servers, gentlemen.

        @VPSFAN, we are currently in the early stages of a cloud VPS service and yes, we are planning to have a Europe cloud.

        USA cloud deployment will be completed by first quarter 2012.

        We are targeting 3rd Quarter 2012 for European cloud VPS services.

        And yes, it will be a “REAL” cloud ie. redundant :)

        Thank you for using our services.

        August 8, 2011 @ 3:15 am | Reply
  4. andy:

    HI,
    do you offer windows support on your xen?
    or can I use my own iso on it?

    August 6, 2011 @ 3:43 pm | Reply
    • Hello Andy

      Unfortunately, these are not our “Load your Own ISO” plans. We sometimes have $1 bid specials on “Load your Own ISO” for Xen HVM. But at the current time, no specials, on Xen HVM, only regular pricing.

      August 8, 2011 @ 3:16 am | Reply
  5. Oh, looks very good look.

    August 7, 2011 @ 9:51 am | Reply
  6. May I know how many ips included? Thanks

    August 13, 2011 @ 6:40 am | Reply
  7. david tommy:

    hello,

    I have plan purchase your vps. Do you have promo code? i want get 2 for our dns cluster.

    thank you

    dt

    August 24, 2011 @ 4:08 pm | Reply
    • Hello David Tommy

      We do have some promo codes you can use. Have you tried the codes listed in the blog post above?

      If that is not the plan you are looking for, please visit
      http://www.kiloserve.com/cheapvps

      That will give you the correct promo codes to use..some codes only work on some plans, see the info box in the plan and it will tell you the code to use.

      August 25, 2011 @ 12:27 am | Reply
  8. Jamie:

    Performance is really fantastic, but it’s looking like a ghost town. I’ve had a reverse DNS ticket request open for over 24 hours with no response. Bit of a shame.

    September 4, 2011 @ 11:58 pm | Reply
    • Hi Jamie

      Unfortunately, rDNS is one of those things that takes awhile to complete…up to 72 hours.

      If this will not work for you, please let us know please let us know and we’ll provide a refund.

      September 5, 2011 @ 12:03 am | Reply
  9. Jamie:

    A response saying you’re looking into it or something would’ve been nice. Glad to know you’re here though. :)

    September 5, 2011 @ 12:10 am | Reply
    • Hello Jamie

      We usually don’t personally respond to “rDNS” requests as we have so many of them. We just get it done.

      September 5, 2011 @ 12:11 am | Reply
      • Jamie:

        Why not though? rDNS requests are usually the first thing someone asks for and leaving them hanging for “up to 72 hours” waiting for a response isn’t a good first impression – at least not to me. It’d only take a minute or so at the max, or even just a canned response.

        Anyways, the rest of my experience has been really good, so i’m staying. Just some feedback for you.

        September 5, 2011 @ 12:17 am | Reply
        • Good Day Jamie

          rDNS and DNS are known to take time; that is why we don’t answer our rDNS requests, we just do them.

          You should have received a confirmation email when you sent in the support ticket.

          Thank you for your feedback and please enjoy your stay.

          September 5, 2011 @ 12:30 am | Reply
      • If you have smaller then /24 IP allocations ask the upstream to delegate the rDNS then, it is very simple. http://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/ch9/reverse.html If you have /24 allocations, why is it taking longer then 30 seconds?

        September 5, 2011 @ 12:32 am | Reply
        • Unfortunately, we also have to submit a ticket to get rDNS changes done.

          September 5, 2011 @ 12:38 am | Reply
        • You didn’t read what I said then, there is no reason other then your upstream is stubborn to not do it yourself. And if stubborn in the reason, might be time to start shopping for a new upstream.

          September 5, 2011 @ 12:47 am | Reply
        • Yes, our upstream is stubborn.

          But our speeds our great so we’re not going to nitpick them on 72 hour rDNS. If our clients can overlook 72 hours to get rDNS setup, they can look forward to a high quality VPS with fast CPU and fast I/O.

          That’s good enough for us.

          wget http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
          --2011-09-04 17:44:07--  http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
          Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net... 205.234.175.175
          Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net|205.234.175.175|:80... connected.
          HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
          Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream]
          Saving to: `100mb.test.1'
          
          100%[===================================================================================>] 104,857,600 45.5M/s   in 2.2s    
          
          2011-09-04 17:44:10 (45.5 MB/s) - `100mb.test.1' saved [104857600/104857600]
          
          September 5, 2011 @ 12:49 am | Reply
        • ab:

          assuming where their site is hosted is the upstream, time warner/road runner business class is not what I would call 1) fast at responding to anything or 2) competent in any way…

          September 5, 2011 @ 12:50 am | Reply
  10. Outside of rDNS requests, we don’t really interact with Time Warner support.

    Time Warner gigabit fiber is fast and reliable so we’re happy with them.

    If you’ve never used Time Warner fiber, it is quite fast.
    http://www.speedtest.net/result/1466430775.png

    September 5, 2011 @ 1:23 am | Reply
  11. I signed up for this 512MB Xen VPS from Kiloserve today, and I’ve been working on getting it set up. It has 10GB of storage and 250GB bandwidth now. Setup was quick (about 20 minutes), and a ticket for reverse DNS was replied to within 3 minutes. It’s no problem waiting 72 hours for the rDNS request to go through.

    # dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 2.98462 seconds, 360 MB/s
    
    # hdparm -t /dev/sda1
    
    /dev/sda1:
     Timing buffered disk reads:  712 MB in  3.00 seconds = 237.08 MB/sec
    
    October 20, 2011 @ 3:01 pm | Reply
    • The reverse DNS request was completed without issue, in much less than 72 hours.

      October 22, 2011 @ 8:26 am | Reply
  12. Jamie:

    After the whole eNetSouth/eNSCloud issue, i’ve moved my sites over to Kiloserve. I’ve been really impressed with the performance and support (other than the earlier issue, but we’ve moved on ;)) has been great.

    No complaints from me. :)

    October 22, 2011 @ 8:29 am | Reply
  13. I must say that kiloserv do wonder job. Their server is excellent. I have been with them for most 1 year and now ordering new vps.

    their IO unbeatable by other vps provider

    [root@ans ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 4.86735 seconds, 221 MB/s
    
    [root@ans ~]# 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, 6.7577 seconds, 159 MB/s
    

    Good job Kiloserv

    January 18, 2012 @ 4:26 am | Reply
  14. Adrian:

    IF we used the 50% off code for an yearly payment hows the next invoice gonna look like? It will have the full price or still the 50% off price that we used with the code?

    November 14, 2012 @ 5:32 pm | Reply
  15. Adrian:

    Thanks David.

    I never submited a ticket as i didn’t needed but in terms of uptime and resources they were great. I’m curious though if the coming invoice will still be 50% off or not. No idea if the promo code was lifetime or one time payment.

    November 15, 2012 @ 4:23 pm | Reply
  16. Gonzalo:

    I have three VPSs with Kiloserve and all of them are down. Their website is down too. No DNS. It sounds very bad…

    February 14, 2013 @ 7:58 pm | Reply
  17. NateN34:

    Deadpool!

    February 20, 2013 @ 4:22 am | Reply
  18. gabriel:

    Last week 16h down, and now around 30h down and still waiting… Their web and DNS and everything is down. All my VPSs are down. Last week the problem was the network I think. Somebody knows something?

    February 20, 2013 @ 6:23 am | Reply
  19. Gonzalo:

    I think Kiloserve was in iMountain data center, and their website is down:
    http://www.imountain.com/
    So, is Kiloserve down or is imountain down?

    February 21, 2013 @ 12:26 pm | Reply
  20. Gonzalo:

    I wonder what happen with my money and other’s money. I think Kiloserve still have around $100 from me. If they do not provide the services, then they should give me back my money. If not, then they have stolen me. Nobody knows who is the manager of Kiloserve?, he/she should be banned forever to work here. We should join together to take him to the justice. Is not possible?, cannot do anything?, are we sheep?

    February 21, 2013 @ 2:14 pm | Reply
    • john:

      they are gone long time ago…scammed..

      February 21, 2013 @ 3:08 pm | Reply
      • Gonzalo:

        Last week it happened almost the same, but after several hours I could access my vps, and I saw that the server had been up all the time, so it was a network problem. But now it seems they have run away like criminals.

        February 21, 2013 @ 4:14 pm | Reply
  21. David:

    For anybody trying to recover their Kiloserve/iMountain data, I noticed this post on WHT about a company that has access to the old iMountain data center and can assist in data recovery (for a fee).

    http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1241970

    February 28, 2013 @ 11:23 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 *