Hosting Websites on Bare Minimum VPS/Dedicated Servers

LeaseWeb – $6 512MB KVM in Virginia, USA and €5 512MB KVM in Frankfurt, Germany

Tags: , , , , Date/Time: January 18, 2013 @ 2:19 pm, by Liam

I bet you were not expecting this! LeaseWeb, contacted us with their first ever offer on LowEndBox. They’re offering LowEndBox readers a 65% Lifetime Discount on their US based KVM servers and 45% on their German KVM servers.

Express-S Cloud US

  • 1 CPU Core
  • 512MB RAM
  • 40GB Diskspace
  • 500GB Bandwidth
  • 1000Mbit Port Speed
  • 1 IPv4 Address
  • KVM Virtulization
  • $6/Month – Order Link
  • Location: Manassas, Virginia
Express-S Cloud DE

  • 1 CPU Core
  • 512MB RAM
  • 40GB Diskspace
  • 500GB Bandwidth
  • 1000Mbit Port Speed
  • 1 IPv4 Address
  • KVM Virtulization
  • €5/Month – Order Link
  • Location: Frankfurt, Germany

LeaseWeb is “a worldwide Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) provider” who were founded in 1997. At present, they claim to have over 50,000 servers under their management. They use SAN storage in RAID 10 for their diskspace. Their platform is fully redundant and is built with CloudStack technology at the core. If you’re interested in learning more about the technical setup, take a look at their blog. Once you’ve ordered, you can request a a free IPv6 range by emailing their support team. I couldn’t find any recent review regarding their KVM/Cloud servers; so if you’re a customer, be sure to share your thoughts!

After ordering, your server should be delivered to you within 24 hours but usually they’re deployed instantly. You can view more of their “Express-S Cloud” plans viewed here. LeaseWeb support the following payment methods: Credit card, PayPal, Bank Transfer and iDeal. VAT is not included in the price, so if you reside in Europe and don’t have a valid VAT ID, you will have to pay it. Terms and conditions, and other legal documents, can be found here.

Network Information:

Virginian servers will be deployed at the EvoSwitch datacenter in Manassas (US) and German servers will be provisioned at the Telehouse datacenter in Frankfurt (DE). LeaseWeb’s parent company, OCOM, also happen to own EvoSwitch.

Manassas, Virginia

Test IPv4: 108.59.10.97
Test File: http://mirror.us.leaseweb.net/speedtest/10mb.bin
Test File: http://mirror.us.leaseweb.net/speedtest/100mb.bin
Test File: http://mirror.us.leaseweb.net/speedtest/1000mb.bin
Test File: http://mirror.us.leaseweb.net/speedtest/10000mb.bin

Frankfurt, Germany

Test IPv4: 46.165.198.1
Test File: http://mirror.de.leaseweb.net/speedtest/10mb.bin
Test File: http://mirror.de.leaseweb.net/speedtest/100mb.bin
Test File: http://mirror.de.leaseweb.net/speedtest/1000mb.bin
Test File: http://mirror.de.leaseweb.net/speedtest/10000mb.bin

68 Comments

  1. camarg:

    I wish they would offer a low end dedi as well

    January 18, 2013 @ 2:56 pm | Reply
  2. camarg:

    If you try to order a vps from their german location, you get the following message

    Please note that LeaseWeb Deutschland GmbH does not provide services or products to consumers. If you continue your order at LeaseWeb Deutschland GmbH, you declare that you are either a natural person acting as a professional (i.e. not as a consumer) or acting for and on behalf of a legal entity. If your order is for private uses only, please choose a different datacenter to continue (prices shown in the configuration summary will change accordingly).
    
    January 18, 2013 @ 3:00 pm | Reply
    • I’m Rogier from LeaseWeb. You’re correct that LeaseWeb GmbH (Deutschland) only sells to companies (B2B). Hopefully we’ll be able to sell to consumers soon! For now, as a consumer you’ll be able to order an Express Cloud in the United States or Netherlands.

      January 18, 2013 @ 3:46 pm | Reply
  3. Spencer:

    I ordered, waiting on it to be setup. Let see how this is!

    January 18, 2013 @ 3:13 pm | Reply
    • dano:

      Just ordered a VA node to see how it performs – it took about 21 minutes from Paypal order to getting the IP address of the server. This is my first Lease Web experience, so it took me 5 minutes to find where they hide the default root password. Now that I am on the node, I think I can feel everyone “bench marking at once”, so I will not judge the nodes performance just yet ;)

      Otherwise, the control panel and system are quite professional – I like the fact you can null route IP’s from the control panel is nice, and of cource the usual like rDNS, can be modded here.

      As someone else mentioned, there is no VNC or anything, so I guess you are stuck with what they offer as far as OS images are concerned. So far so good though, no real complaints.

      January 18, 2013 @ 4:46 pm | Reply
  4. MrPiang:

    Never knew the Leaseweb also on LEB, Anyway good offer but don’t expect too friendly support from them.

    January 18, 2013 @ 3:16 pm | Reply
  5. j0bb13:

    We’ve got a VPS from LeaseWeb in The Netherlands, can say it performs good and it hasn’t gone offline since we’ve got it :)

    January 18, 2013 @ 3:29 pm | Reply
  6. I have one,the control panel has single function,

    Only through the support ticket reinstall. no VNC, no CDROM

    January 18, 2013 @ 3:33 pm | Reply
  7. Richard:

    Is there any guarantee uptime? Also if i dont have VNC, its mean i cant install custom OS?

    January 18, 2013 @ 3:56 pm | Reply
    • Richard:

      And 1000Mbit Port Speed. Each VPS has dedicate 1Gbps port or what?

      January 18, 2013 @ 3:58 pm | Reply
      • Thanks for your questions. We offer our Best Effort SLA with the Express Cloud. There is no guaranteed uptime. Furthermore, we offer SSH/RDP access for Linux/Windows machines. We don’t offer Console or custom OS installation currently. Lastly, as the platform is shared (public cloud), the 1Gbps port is not dedicated.

        January 18, 2013 @ 4:23 pm | Reply
      • 1Gbit dedi port for each LEB VPS … get real …

        January 19, 2013 @ 11:50 am | Reply
  8. Thanks Liam for posting this offer which seems to be an amazing one.
    Got myself a box in US location just now, benchmarking it and will post results soon

    Right now, I was a bit disappointed to see everything being done via Support tickets only and the ones that are suppose to be done by support-tickets are available as options (rDNS, Null route and IPv4)

    lets see how the box performs

    January 18, 2013 @ 4:27 pm | Reply
  9. t:

    Anyone got some benchmarks for VA KVM? Down/up, specifically?

    January 18, 2013 @ 4:27 pm | Reply
  10. CPU Core

    processor	: 0
    vendor_id	: GenuineIntel
    cpu family	: 6
    model		: 13
    model name	: QEMU Virtual CPU version (cpu64-rhel6)
    stepping	: 3
    cpu MHz	: 2400.116
    cache size	: 4096 KB

    vmstat

    procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu----
     r  b   swpd   free   buff  cache   si   so    bi    bo   in   cs us sy id wa
     0  0      0 333732  10576 142044    0    0    30   448   24   22  0  0 99  1

    Disk IO results

    Classic Disk I/O test # 1 (dd if=/dev/zero of=iotest1 bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync)
    16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 19.5211 s, 55.0 MB/s
    I/O speed :  55.0 MB/s 
    
    Classic Disk I/O test # 2 (dd if=/dev/zero of=iotest2 bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync)
    16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 20.0954 s, 53.4 MB/s
    I/O speed :  53.4 MB/s 
    
    Classic Disk I/O test # 3 (dd if=/dev/zero of=iotest3 bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync)
    16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 17.1414 s, 62.6 MB/s
    I/O speed :  62.6 MB/s
    
    Advance Disk I/O test # 1
    (dd if=/dev/zero of=iotest4 bs=1M count=1k conv=fdatasync)
    1024+0 records in 1024+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 18.0245 s, 59.6 MB/s
    I/O speed :  59.6 MB/s 
    
    Advance Disk I/O test # 2
    (dd if=/dev/zero of=iotest5 bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync)
    16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 17.8548 s, 60.1 MB/s
    I/O speed :  60.1 MB/s 

    IOPing results

    IOPing I/O test ( ioping -c 10 . 2>&1 )
    4096 bytes from . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root): request=1 time=3.9 ms
    4096 bytes from . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root): request=2 time=0.8 ms
    4096 bytes from . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root): request=3 time=0.9 ms
    4096 bytes from . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root): request=4 time=0.7 ms
    4096 bytes from . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root): request=5 time=0.8 ms
    4096 bytes from . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root): request=6 time=0.7 ms
    4096 bytes from . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root): request=7 time=0.8 ms
    4096 bytes from . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root): request=8 time=1.0 ms
    4096 bytes from . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root): request=9 time=0.9 ms
    4096 bytes from . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root): request=10 time=0.9 ms
    
    --- . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root) ioping statistics ---
    10 requests completed in 9013.2 ms, 882 iops, 3.4 mb/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 0.7/1.1/3.9/0.9 ms
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    
    IOPing seek rate test ( ioping -RD . 2>&1 )
    
    --- . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root) ioping statistics ---
    4125 requests completed in 3000.2 ms, 1549 iops, 6.0 mb/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 0.4/0.6/52.3/1.2 ms
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    
    IOPing sequential test ( ioping -RL . 2>&1 )
    
    --- . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root) ioping statistics ---
    869 requests completed in 3001.2 ms, 299 iops, 74.8 mb/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 2.8/3.3/61.3/3.4 ms
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    
    IOPing cached test ( ioping -RC . 2>&1 )
    
    --- . (ext4 /dev/mapper/vg0-root) ioping statistics ---
    38867 requests completed in 3000.1 ms, 412220 iops, 1610.2 mb/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 0.0/0.0/0.1/0.0 ms

    Network tests

    Network download test # 1
    Download from Cachefly (http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test)
    Got 38.2MB/s
    Network download test # 2
    Download from Cachefly (http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test)
    Got 52.4MB/s
    Network download test # 3
    Download from Cachefly (http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test)
    Got 64.1MB/s
    Download from Linode, Atlanta, GA, USA (http://atlanta1.linode.com/100MB-atlanta.bin)
    Got 596KB/s
    Download from Linode, Dallas, TX, USA (http://dallas1.linode.com/100MB-dallas.bin)
    Got 10.8MB/s
    Download from Linode, Tokyo, JP (http://tokyo1.linode.com/100MB-tokyo.bin)
    Got 5.12MB/s
    Download from Linode, London, UK (http://speedtest.london.linode.com/100MB-london.bin)
    Got 7.81MB/s
    Download from OVH, Paris, France (http://proof.ovh.net/files/100Mio.dat)
    Got 10.9MB/s
    Download from SmartDC, Rotterdam, Netherlands (http://mirror.i3d.net/100mb.bin)
    Got 9.06MB/s
    Download from Hetzner, Nuremberg, Germany (http://hetzner.de/100MB.iso)
    Got 11.6MB/s
    Download from iiNet, Perth, WA, Australia (http://ftp.iinet.net.au/test100MB.dat)
    Got 4.03MB/s
    Download from Leaseweb, Haarlem, NL, USA (http://mirror.leaseweb.com/speedtest/100mb.bin)
    Got 12.4MB/s
    Download from Softlayer, Singapore (http://speedtest.sng01.softlayer.com/downloads/test100.zip)
    Got 4.53MB/s
    Download from Softlayer, Seattle, WA, USA (http://speedtest.sea01.softlayer.com/downloads/test100.zip)
    Got 12.4MB/s
    Download from Softlayer, San Jose, CA, USA (http://speedtest.sjc01.softlayer.com/downloads/test100.zip)
    Got 13.7MB/s
    Download from Softlayer, Washington, DC, USA (http://speedtest.wdc01.softlayer.com/downloads/test100.zip)
    Got 51.4MB/s

    and finally, the real test UnixBench

    ========================================================================
       BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.3)
    
       System: LeaseWeb-KVM512: GNU/Linux
       OS: GNU/Linux -- 2.6.32-5-686 -- #1 SMP Mon Jan 16 16:04:25 UTC 2012
       Machine: i686 (unknown)
       Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="UTF-8", collate="UTF-8")
       CPU 0: QEMU Virtual CPU version (cpu64-rhel6) (4800.2 bogomips)
              x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSCALL/SYSRET
       17:04:57 up 53 min,  2 users,  load average: 0.00, 0.12, 0.09; runlevel 2
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Benchmark Run: Fri Jan 18 2013 17:04:57 - 17:33:14
    1 CPU in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests
    
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables       16182408.0 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Double-Precision Whetstone                     2805.3 MWIPS (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Execl Throughput                               5458.3 lps   (29.9 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks        757001.8 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks          202113.5 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks       1533667.8 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    Pipe Throughput                             1280836.2 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Pipe-based Context Switching                 321468.0 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Process Creation                              21415.3 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                   6987.3 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                    893.4 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
    System Call Overhead                        1162880.4 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    
    System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0   16182408.0   1386.7
    Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0       2805.3    510.1
    Execl Throughput                                 43.0       5458.3   1269.4
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0     757001.8   1911.6
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0     202113.5   1221.2
    File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0    1533667.8   2644.3
    Pipe Throughput                               12440.0    1280836.2   1029.6
    Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0     321468.0    803.7
    Process Creation                                126.0      21415.3   1699.6
    Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4       6987.3   1647.9
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0        893.4   1489.1
    System Call Overhead                          15000.0    1162880.4    775.3
                                                                       ========
    System Benchmarks Index Score                                        1252.0
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Benchmark Run: Fri Jan 18 2013 17:33:14 - 18:01:30
    1 CPU in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests
    
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables       16165477.2 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Double-Precision Whetstone                     2811.4 MWIPS (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Execl Throughput                               5429.9 lps   (29.9 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks        770767.5 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks          202402.8 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks       1571321.9 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    Pipe Throughput                             1279444.7 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Pipe-based Context Switching                 322174.9 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Process Creation                              21003.0 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                   6911.5 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                    893.5 lpm   (60.1 s, 2 samples)
    System Call Overhead                        1164152.0 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    
    System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0   16165477.2   1385.2
    Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0       2811.4    511.2
    Execl Throughput                                 43.0       5429.9   1262.8
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0     770767.5   1946.4
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0     202402.8   1223.0
    File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0    1571321.9   2709.2
    Pipe Throughput                               12440.0    1279444.7   1028.5
    Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0     322174.9    805.4
    Process Creation                                126.0      21003.0   1666.9
    Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4       6911.5   1630.1
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0        893.5   1489.2
    System Call Overhead                          15000.0    1164152.0    776.1
                                                                       ========
    System Benchmarks Index Score                                        1253.2
    

    Hope it helps somebody!!

    January 18, 2013 @ 5:12 pm | Reply
  11. Amazed to see Lease Web on LEB!

    January 18, 2013 @ 6:00 pm | Reply
  12. Joe Merit:

    Can anyone comment on the IPV6 in the U.S. location? does it work?

    January 18, 2013 @ 6:29 pm | Reply
    • dano:

      Regarding IPv6 — I contacted LeaseWeb support and had a /64 assigned to my host in VA(USA) within the hour.

      January 19, 2013 @ 1:33 pm | Reply
      • Joe Merit:

        Did you get it working though?

        January 20, 2013 @ 11:02 am | Reply
  13. My serverbear.com test result http://serverbear.com/benchmark/2013/01/18/UOXs0HX6pPo8E1BH
    Although its good from other VMs that I owe but still is no match for my other KVM 512MB benchmark (probably because it has two vCPU cores)

    January 18, 2013 @ 7:17 pm | Reply
    • Interesting to see the might leaseweb post an offer here :)

      Although the raw numbers show a little below average if anything my thoughts on leaseweb were always that it is all about the quality of the network.

      Great work and hats off to who ever convinced them to make an offer :)

      January 18, 2013 @ 7:40 pm | Reply
      • Robert van der Meulen:

        Note that those serverbear benchmarks have been made on a platform that has been expanded quite a bit to allow for more performance. I’ll contact the serverbear guys to get those benchmarks redone. In the mean time, feel free to do your own and post them here :)

        January 18, 2013 @ 11:04 pm | Reply
        • ServerBear.com is a free service which anyone can run on their VPS/Dedicated and they post the results on their website.

          If you want, I can rerun the benchmark.

          January 19, 2013 @ 8:42 am | Reply
      • Spirit:

        @Asim and @Anthony those things can’t be directly compared. SAN storage I/O latency will show almost always worse result in those tests compared with DAS however things can drasticly change in SAN favour under high load.

        January 18, 2013 @ 11:42 pm | Reply
        • Robert van der Meulen:

          You’re right. We had a long thought about the centralised vs. local storage, but opted for central. Your latencies will be higher if you run ‘off the shelf’ NFS or iSCSI, but there are ways to fix that – in our case we use the fastest drives we can find, add stacks of SSD’s for seperate read/write caching, and run physically seperate networks (redundant and on fast switches) that are only used for storage.
          That gives us nice performance – with the added benefit of a more redundant setup.

          January 19, 2013 @ 1:37 pm | Reply
  14. Robert van der Meulen:

    Hi all,

    Hope you’re enjoying the offer :) I’m responsible for the public cloud products at LeaseWeb, and will be keeping an eye on this thread for anything we can use to make the product better – so let us know if you have anything to say: good or bad.

    I saw a few things already – and I’m glad to say most of it is already on its way. For us it’s simple: we gain customers by making people happy with their products and services, so keep the suggestions going so we can build what you need.

    Robert

    January 18, 2013 @ 11:01 pm | Reply
    • Rober, thank you for your time. Let us know how your customers (like me) can send you suggestion apart from posting publicly here. Thanks

      January 19, 2013 @ 8:52 am | Reply
      • Robert van der Meulen:

        Sure – there’s two options. You can leave your feedback in the self service center (in the support section), but if you like a more personal approach, feel free to contact me on r.vandermeulen at our domainname (leaseweb.com).

        January 19, 2013 @ 1:27 pm | Reply
  15. Sam:

    Joe: i have one in there us location and native ipv6 is not available, however tunnels work.

    January 19, 2013 @ 2:26 am | Reply
    • Robert van der Meulen:

      Drop me a note, and we’ll get you native v6. Should be able to request it via the self service center as well – whichever you prefer.

      January 19, 2013 @ 1:33 pm | Reply
  16. Alex:

    Ordered a cloud in Germany but I got one in the US :(
    I opened a support ticket but I’m afraid that the Leaseweb administration don’t work on weekends ..

    January 19, 2013 @ 6:44 am | Reply
    • Robert van der Meulen:

      You’re right about Administration.
      It happens every once in a while that a customer accidentally orders in the wrong country – I’m not aware of any bug causing that. Sure you didn’t mis-click?
      I do realise you’d like to use your US cloud, so let’s fix that first – if you can contact me (email address above), I’ll make sure you get a fresh cloud on the US platform (i might ask you to order again), and we’ll make sure to credit you for the incorrect one when the work-week starts again, so you don’t have to pay extra. Please include your ticketnumber in your message, so I can find your ticket!

      January 19, 2013 @ 1:32 pm | Reply
  17. Alex:

    I ordered 1 gb cloud in Germany ( 10 e ). I got a Germany customer number but the vps was set on US, I don’t want that !

    January 19, 2013 @ 1:42 pm | Reply
    • Robert van der Meulen:

      Solved via private communication.

      January 19, 2013 @ 4:13 pm | Reply
  18. How long will this offer last Robert? Is this pricing something we could rely on in future in case I want to resell these ?

    January 19, 2013 @ 2:25 pm | Reply
    • Robert van der Meulen:

      Hi Amar,

      At least for one or two weeks more, but we’ll go back to our regular pricing at some point in time. We do have a reseller program, and do discounts if you pay further in advance on any order. That said, our normal pricing is not bad at all :)

      Robert

      January 19, 2013 @ 2:31 pm | Reply
  19. Bob:

    Would be great to see a LEB offer in the Netherlands, do you plan to have such an offer soon?

    Nice to see leaseweb around here, great company/network :)

    January 19, 2013 @ 9:47 pm | Reply
    • Thanks! Currently, we have no plans to make LEB offer for the Netherlands. This is really a one-off.

      January 21, 2013 @ 8:03 am | Reply
    • Rob M.:

      Have a look at Tilaa, where pricing starts at 3.90 EUR. Great platform, and proper support, too.

      January 28, 2013 @ 3:22 pm | Reply
  20. Tom:

    Does lease web still not cap BW, I remember horror stories from WHT when people got DDOS and received 2000-3000$ bw changes bill, never bough anything from them after reading such posts.

    January 20, 2013 @ 11:27 am | Reply
    • Roro Qiu:

      That would be very horrible if that’s true.

      January 20, 2013 @ 1:18 pm | Reply
      • Thanks for your question. We provide custom bandwidth notifications through our customer portal (SSC). You can set a notification there. We’ll also send you with a notification when you’re at 95% usage. There is no bandwidth cap.

        January 21, 2013 @ 10:04 am | Reply
  21. Ya:

    There is no offers of hosting in Europe for private person, isn’t it?

    January 21, 2013 @ 12:37 am | Reply
    • That’s correct. As a consumer you can buy the Express Cloud hosted in the Netherlands from 9 euro. However, the discounts are only valid for the Express Cloud hosted in Germany and the United States. Currently, LeaseWeb GmbH (Germany) only sells to companies (B2B). We’re working on selling to consumers in Germany, but I’m afraid that won’t be in time for this promotion.

      January 21, 2013 @ 8:11 am | Reply
  22. Joe:

    :-( i can not pay with creditcard shit

    only paypal ?

    January 21, 2013 @ 8:55 am | Reply
    • You should be able to pay using Credit Card via Paypal as well. You don’t need a Paypal account to use it.

      January 21, 2013 @ 9:14 am | Reply
      • Joe:

        No paypal will always create an account for me
        no go

        January 21, 2013 @ 9:37 am | Reply
        • We offer several payment options: credit card, PayPal, bank transfer and iDeal. If you can’t pay with a credit card or PayPal, then you can pay with a bank transfer (or iDeal).

          January 21, 2013 @ 10:06 am | Reply
  23. Joe:

    i will only pay with credit card please not Credit Card via Paypal

    January 21, 2013 @ 3:28 pm | Reply
    • Our payment provider for credit card payments is PayPall. However, you don’t have to set up an account to make a credit card payment. If you choose the credit card payment option during check out, then you will be directed to PayPall where you can pay as a guest (without setting up an account).

      January 21, 2013 @ 10:58 pm | Reply
  24. @Rogier – is it possible to setup BGP session/peering?

    January 23, 2013 @ 1:03 am | Reply
    • Hi Peter,

      If you would like to peer with us, you should get in touch with our networking department – more info on http://leasewebnoc.com/ . If you’re talking about running a software router (in our express Cloud), and re-using your own IP space on your instances with us, I’m afraid that’s not possible.

      Robert

      January 24, 2013 @ 6:26 am | Reply
  25. Rob M.:

    So far, pretty good, but not exactly a lightweight install of CentOS6, at about 120MB memory usage. Lots of preinstalled stuff. And 4GB of swap space seems a bit extreme for a 512MB machine.

    January 27, 2013 @ 11:12 pm | Reply
  26. ray:

    Does the discount apply to future upgrades? Also I’ve noticed that Windows is available for larger plans, is it possible to use owned Windows license?

    February 1, 2013 @ 3:04 pm | Reply
  27. MrPiang:

    I just ordered a VM with them at their US Location received a mail said the server is ready to use come with a IPs address, Then I try to login to SSH no luck ping time out, I can’t even tracroute or PING it. Raise a ticket to them more than 1hour ago no respond at all.

    February 4, 2013 @ 8:22 pm | Reply
  28. ura soul:

    so.. have these offers ended now? was there ever a date published for the end of the offer? the links go to empty carts

    February 18, 2013 @ 5:07 pm | Reply
  29. Chris:

    Commenting here so I’ll be notified if there’s an answer to the previous question. I too would like to order, but it goes to an empty cart. Thanks.

    February 19, 2013 @ 2:45 am | Reply
    • I’m sorry for the confusion. The offer has ended with the launch of our new Cloud line-up last week. I’ll contact LEB to create a new offer.

      In order to celebrate the launch, we offer discounts up to 50% for a limited time. Our Cloud line-up now consists of Virtual Server from €7 (NL/DE) and $7 (US) per month. Furthermore, we introduced the LeaseWeb Cloud, which includes a Private Virtual Network). This product starts at €13 per month (NL/DE). It will soon be available in the US.

      You can find the line up on the Cloud Hosting overview page: http://www.leaseweb.com/en/cloud-hosting. Our current offers can be found on: http://www.leaseweb.com/en/cloud-campaign.

      February 20, 2013 @ 4:54 pm | Reply
  30. Jules:

    Total lack of response to major issues. Don’t be fooled by a smart site presentation. Server downtime on regular basis.
    Support responds when they feel like ( if you in luck, usually not at all). What a waste of cash.

    February 23, 2013 @ 1:59 pm | Reply
    • I’m really sorry you had this experience. We always strive to provide excellent support. If you send me an email with your ticket number and customer number then I’ll ask our Support department to look into it.

      March 11, 2013 @ 10:34 am | Reply
  31. Aliech:

    They not provide VNC access to VPS. It’s bad.

    March 26, 2013 @ 8:45 am | Reply
  32. Andrew:

    [code]
    BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.3)

    System: PXPH001: GNU/Linux
    OS: GNU/Linux — 3.2.0-4-amd64 — #1 SMP Debian 3.2.46-1
    Machine: x86_64 (unknown)
    Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap=”UTF-8″, collate=”UTF-8″)
    CPU 0: QEMU Virtual CPU version (cpu64-rhel6) (4788.0 bogomips)
    x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET
    18:06:22 up 3 days, 7:52, 1 user, load average: 0.41, 0.76, 0.58; runlevel 2

    ————————————————————————
    Benchmark Run: Mon Jul 29 2013 18:06:22 – 18:35:03
    1 CPU in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests

    Dhrystone 2 using register variables 16489495.3 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Double-Precision Whetstone 2058.2 MWIPS (9.4 s, 7 samples)
    Execl Throughput 1650.1 lps (29.9 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 412226.9 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 128507.7 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1009392.0 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    Pipe Throughput 1304794.2 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Pipe-based Context Switching 201690.0 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
    Process Creation 6140.8 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
    Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 3754.6 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples)
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 443.1 lpm (60.3 s, 2 samples)
    System Call Overhead 2674865.2 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)

    System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 16489495.3 1413.0
    Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 2058.2 374.2
    Execl Throughput 43.0 1650.1 383.7
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 412226.9 1041.0
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 128507.7 776.5
    File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 1009392.0 1740.3
    Pipe Throughput 12440.0 1304794.2 1048.9
    Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 201690.0 504.2
    Process Creation 126.0 6140.8 487.4
    Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 3754.6 885.5
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 443.1 738.5
    System Call Overhead 15000.0 2674865.2 1783.2
    ========
    System Benchmarks Index Score 814.9
    [/code]

    July 29, 2013 @ 4:36 pm | Reply
  33. Andrew:

    root@PXPH001:~# dd if=/dev/zero of=/home/2gb.dat bs=8k count=256k conv=fdatasync
    262144+0 records in
    262144+0 records out
    2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 50.5296 s, 42.5 MB/s

    root@PXPH001:~# dd if=/dev/zero of=/home/2gb.dat bs=8k count=256k conv=fdatasync
    262144+0 records in
    262144+0 records out
    2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 70.1757 s, 30.6 MB/s

    root@PXPH001:~# dd if=/dev/zero of=/home/2gb.dat bs=8k count=256k conv=fdatasync
    262144+0 records in
    262144+0 records out
    2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 56.0956 s, 38.3 MB/s

    July 29, 2013 @ 4:37 pm | Reply
  34. Daniel:

    LeaseWeb is the most incompetent company ever. I tell you from a 2 year experience of “working” with them. Their systems are down for hours at a time. I recommend you to search further than these incompetents. if you call their support, is like talking to a wall. All you got is some excuses from a lady, several hours, after your instance finally started running again. Pathetic, that’s the best descriptive word for LeaseWeb. If you want pathetic hosting, go with them. Good luck.

    Right now, I have a ping reply of 3668ms. After about 20 min of pinging a LeaseWeb VPS. Now is “Request timed out.” all over again. And this is the norm at LeaseWeb. The worst web hosting company ever. This is a joke.

    February 18, 2014 @ 1:23 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. Quoting webhostingtalk.com URL seems to get binned consistently here, but I do peek into the spam box frequently to publish those comments.
  • 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 *