LowEndBox - Cheap VPS, Hosting and Dedicated Server Deals

QuickWeb - $2.99/Month 128MB Xen VPS in Florida, LA & Phoenix + German OpenVZ

Roel from QuickWeb Hosting Solutions has a few exclusive offers for LowEndBox readers available in either Los Angeles, Phoenix, Florida or Germany.

Budget XEN VPS I

  • 1 x Intel CPU Core
  • 128MB RAM
  • 5GB RAID10 Diskspace
  • 300GB Bandwidth
  • 10Mbit Port
  • SolusVM/XEN
  • $2.99/mo (pre-paid annually)
  • Order: FloridaLos AngelesPhoenix

  • 1 x Intel CPU Core
  • 256MB RAM
  • 10GB RAID10 Diskspace
  • 500GB Bandwidth
  • Free upgrade to a 100Mbit Port
  • SolusVM/Xen
  • $6.95 Monthly
  • Order: FloridaLos AngelesPhoenix

Quickweb were once one of the most popular hosts on LowEndBox. They won the Top Providers poll back in 2010 and came runners up twice in 2011. However this is the first time we have heard from them since December 2011! Today they’re offering a variety of Xen and OpenVZ VPS plans available on Monthly, Semi-Annualy and Annual contracts. Annual contracts reduce the price substantially and allow some plans which would of been excluded to be listed. A further three OpenVZ plans are listed below.

Budget OpenVZ VPS I

  • 1 x Intel Xeon CPU Core
  • 128MB RAM
  • 256MB Burst RAM
  • 6GB RAID10 Diskspace
  • 100GB Bandwidth
  • 10Mbit port
  • SolusVM/OpenVZ
  • 1 x IPv4
  • $1.99/mo (pre-paid annually)
  • Location Phoenix Los Angeles
Budget OpenVZ VPS II

  • 1 x Intel Xeon CPU Core
  • 256MB RAM
  • 384MB Burst RAM
  • 10GB RAID10 Diskspace
  • 250GB Bandwidth
  • 10Mbit port
  • SolusVM/OpenVZ
  • 1 x IPv4
  • $2.99/mo (pre-paid annually)
  • Location Phoenix Los Angeles Germany
Budget OpenVZ VPS III

  • 1 x Intel Xeon CPU Core
  • 384MB RAM
  • 512MB Burst RAM
  • 20GB RAID10 Diskspace
  • 500GB Bandwidth
  • 100Mbit port
  • SolusVM/OpenVZ
  • 1 x IPv4 address
  • 1 x IPv6 (upon request – Phoenix only)
  • $6.99 Monthly
  • Location Phoenix Los Angeles Germany

QuickWeb kindly hosted LowEndBox for almost two years. They accept payment via Paypal, Visa, Mastercard and Amex. When ordering you can upgrade the network port to a 100Mbit port for $10 per year or a 1000Mbit port for $15 per year. Additional IPv4’s can also be purchased subject to ARIN justification and IPv6 is only currently available in Phoenix. Other upgrades are also available to purchase.

Network Information

They operate their own AS Network and own their IPv4 space.

Los Angeles, California:
Phoenix, Arizona:
Jacksonville, Florida:
Düsseldorf, Germany: Contact them.

For More Information, check out their dedicated LowEndBox page.


  1. Rules say

    $48.00/Year or less for Yearly Billing (~USD $4.00/Month)

    Hence “Budget XEN VPS II” does not qualify to be listed here

    October 5, 2012 @ 12:19 pm | Reply
    • Fixed, thanks Asim! Are you still doing the SecureDragon offer?

      October 5, 2012 @ 12:39 pm | Reply
  2. Dino Suarez:

    2010 called, they want their VPS plans back.

    October 5, 2012 @ 12:34 pm | Reply
  3. One of my best and favorite vps host in 2010 :)
    And it’s been a while we don’t see any offer from Roel until now.
    Thank you for the post.

    October 5, 2012 @ 1:12 pm | Reply
  4. Hello everyone! Special thanks to LEB team for posting our offer, yes it’s been a while and this is our first offer under current LEB management team i think. By the way Budget OpenVZ VPS II order this month will get free 100Mbit port upgrade and all plans get extra 50% more bandwidth. Just put in comment section “LEB Promo” and our staff will manually upgrade your server :) any questions, issues please contact me directly rg(at)quickweb.co.nz

    October 5, 2012 @ 9:00 pm | Reply
  5. Azmi:

    Why no IPv4 test IP for Germany?

    October 5, 2012 @ 10:35 pm | Reply
  6. their budget OpenVZ VPSes are overselling seriously ! the people who want to buy should to read this post http://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/113486

    October 6, 2012 @ 1:59 am | Reply
    • to be fair there are some positive feedbacks as well as few unsatisfied customers especially when the machine they are on had encountered problems people are obviously not happy when it do happen or sometimes customer site becomes popular and their small VPS could not handle the load anymore so their performance can be affected, but that is not the overall picture we have several thousands of customers all over the world and we operate for several years now, so it is not impossible to find few bad experiences however we always thrive to give quality service at lowest possible price we can provide thank you.

      October 8, 2012 @ 1:54 am | Reply
  7. marrco:

    Can’t tell about the US locations, but I have since 2 years a vps with them in Germany (OVZ 384/512 ram with 2 cpu core and 100mb port) and it’s quite slow with really lousy disk performance. Nowadays you definitely can find better vps for that price in Europe. No surprise that in the actual LET TOP providers Quickweb scored so low. http://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/5136/official-top-providers-q3-2012/p1

    October 6, 2012 @ 8:07 am | Reply
    • hello, we scored low because we are not featured here for quite a long time since LEB changed of management so some new members here are not aware of our offerings and not had any opportunity to try us, I do accept the fact that over the years some servers gets lower performance as machine can encounter some trouble a long the way, we continually upgrading and phasing out some old servers and getting the latest “brand new” hardware like what mostly we use now most boxes are based on E3 and E5 Xeons and not the old Xeon 5440 like other budget hosts. I can always attest the quality of our service overall however i acknowledge there maybe 2 or 3 people left unsatisfied due to some hardware issue on specific nodes encountered in the past and i do apologize about it, try us again and we will ensure you will be satisfied.

      October 8, 2012 @ 1:43 am | Reply
      • marrco:

        Hi Roel, i said something different. Problem is with disk IO, not cpu type.

        de:~# ioping /
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=1 time=0.2 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=2 time=0.3 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=3 time=0.1 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=4 time=0.1 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=5 time=0.3 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=6 time=32.4 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=7 time=0.3 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=8 time=14.5 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=9 time=39.0 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=10 time=16.5 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=11 time=0.2 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=12 time=0.2 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=13 time=0.1 ms

        --- / (simfs /dev/simfs) ioping statistics ---
        13 requests completed in 12602.3 ms, 125 iops, 0.5 mb/s
        min/avg/max/mdev = 0.1/8.0/39.0/13.1 ms

        de:~# ioping /
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=1 time=0.3 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=2 time=36.2 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=3 time=13.9 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=4 time=5.1 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=5 time=6.7 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=6 time=11.6 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=7 time=0.1 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=8 time=6.0 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=9 time=16.4 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=10 time=0.3 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=11 time=8.1 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=12 time=0.1 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=13 time=0.2 ms
        4096 bytes from / (simfs /dev/simfs): request=14 time=0.1 ms

        --- / (simfs /dev/simfs) ioping statistics ---
        14 requests completed in 13584.9 ms, 133 iops, 0.5 mb/s
        min/avg/max/mdev = 0.1/7.5/36.2/9.6 ms

        October 8, 2012 @ 7:41 am | Reply
        • Did you tried creating a support ticket?

          October 8, 2012 @ 8:12 am | Reply
        • marrco:

          @Asim, yes of course, and this is the exact answer i got: “i/o speed is something you can just give especially on sold-out node, that other cheap VPS might be on still empty box.”

          btw, that was more than 6 months ago, when performance was worse. Now (the data i just posted) is better, but definitely below other hosts in EU at the same price. And i was comparing their ioping performance to other well known providers here (securedragon) and not new hosts with empty box.

          So i keep my box with them, also because i have an old better coupon (384/512 ram and 100mb port for 2.99) and it’s the only decent vps i found in that specific datacenter. But at the moment there are much better offers in Europe.

          October 8, 2012 @ 8:56 am | Reply
        • Hi marrco, when did you open your ticket? can you please provide me with ticket number i want to investigate this for you. This is not the case of every VPS host server we have hundreds of them, there may be few suffering from bad drives (which do happen as hard drive can fail) so i want to get into the bottom of this for you.

          October 8, 2012 @ 8:38 pm | Reply
        • marrco:

          Hi Roel, thx for you nice marketing talking. No need to investigate, you should know about that. Also because i sent to you a few mail telling about bad io, and offering to pay more to upgrade to a better disk io priority. And the person that sent that answer was.. YOU.

          By the way, when you gave that answer about the competitors being on empty node, i sent to you these stats:

          This is what I get on my quickweb VPS :

          ioping -R .
          — . (simfs /dev/simfs) ioping statistics —
          249 requests completed in 3020.7 ms, 90 iops, 0.4 mb/s
          min/avg/max/mdev = 0.1/11.1/308.0/22.6 ms

          and this what I get with the cheapest vps I have (openvz from securedragon, 12 usd/year, 96mb OpenVZ) and it’s way faster.

          ioping -R .
          — . (simfs /dev/simfs) ioping statistics —
          2600 requests completed in 3000.7 ms, 7038 iops, 27.5 mb/s
          min/avg/max/mdev = 0.1/0.1/84.1/2.3 ms

          i keep (I wrote a small munin plugin) ioping stats for the last year, and QW DE node has always had poor io comparing to other offers. Sometimes you have kernel panic and node get rebooted, sometimes my demons get killed and monit has to restart them.

          The offer i got in march 2011 (384/450 ram, 100mb port for 2.99usd) was much better than this one, and in the meantime new competitors in the leb market offer greater products at a LEB budget price.
          You say the reason you’re not one of the TOP LEB providers is because you’re not featured here for a long time. My guess is that you don’t realize the market has evolved past your old offer.

          October 9, 2012 @ 7:44 am | Reply
      • is that ioping really that bad?

        October 8, 2012 @ 9:26 am | Reply
        • marrco:

          not ‘that bad’ but it’s not stable, so sometimes it’s fast, other times you get slow responses. Not good if you want to host a website. And you can find host with much better price/performance ratio in Europe. I think QW did not improve much in the last few years, so now they lag behind many other hosts.

          October 8, 2012 @ 12:31 pm | Reply
        • understood, the industry has some big leaps this year

          October 8, 2012 @ 3:36 pm | Reply
        • I must admit we are not focusing on lowend market segments lately as we no longer fighting to be lowest prices, we have secured large contracts locally and some overseas from enterprises and some government agencies with single invoices in thousands of dollars not mere few bucks providing them enterprise hosting solutions on dedicate infrastructure… however lowend users still in my heart and i still want to serve them even though we make little to no profit from because there’s some fun and challenges here as well, especially dealing and touching base with clients who are just having fun with their little server. For any issues one can contact me directly as i always offer my email address rg(at)quickweb.co.nz being the Managing Director of QuickWeb i will personally take care of you no matter how small your VPS with us is and no matter if we become a billion dollar company in the future, we are still the little QuickWeb you come to love before :)

          October 8, 2012 @ 8:49 pm | Reply
  8. Don’t bother emailing Roel. He doesn’t respond. He just offers his email out to make folks think he’s going to follow up but never does.

    Folks may want to review previous offers from this company. I had a VPS for nearly a year with this company that I finally tuned back in to them before the year was up due to poor customer service and tickets not being resolved. They even refused to even discuss a billing issue that I had with them.

    October 14, 2012 @ 2:55 pm | Reply
    • Jack:
      October 14, 2012 @ 3:03 pm | Reply
    • marrco:

      WB drmike !

      October 18, 2012 @ 8:13 am | Reply
    • Hi drmike, welcome back… nice to hear your all well. we resolved and continue to do so about 99.9% of tickets and the remaining 0.1% due oi various reasons including customers being difficult to deal with and i guess this is true for all other companies as you cannot please everyone, i have learned to accept the fact over the years in the business. You stay healthy mate and all the best.

      October 18, 2012 @ 9:04 pm | Reply
    • also regarding email, you know the truth, i’m sure i have answered every single email you have sent or sorry if i missed anything as i’m sometimes being too busy but i always endeavor to respond to every emails sent directly to me especially from clients. for those in doubt why not email me and find out whether i’ll get back to your or not if in doubt :) –stay warm my friend.

      October 18, 2012 @ 9:18 pm | Reply
  9. Jacob:

    Wow such much hate! I’ve been with them in Germany for some months and I’ve been quite happy with the server (yes it’s a lowend one 256mb OpenVZ). Hardly needed any support, but was quick once needed.

    October 14, 2012 @ 4:28 pm | Reply
    • Hi Jacob, thank you and i’m pleased you are satisfied with our service a long with the thousands customers we continue to server and being satisfied which is the most important… but if you see all our previous offers these are the few few people saying the same thing over and over for sure they are only less than 10 of them against thousand happy but silent customers in the background, we are in the business for 4 years now if we are that bad there should be hundreds of them around like Santrex. Truth is we have 24×7 and normally responds to ticket within 30 minutes and we have evolved beyond the budget hosting client base.

      October 18, 2012 @ 9:11 pm | Reply
  10. peterson:

    1. my Quickweb

    ~$ ./ioping -R .

    — . ( ) ioping statistics —
    507 requests completed in 3018.6 ms, 198 iops, 0.8 mb/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 0.1/5.0/396.6/24.0 ms

    2. my Ramhost

    ~$ ./ioping -R .

    — . ( ) ioping statistics —
    5986 requests completed in 3000.7 ms, 2037 iops, 8.0 mb/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 0.1/0.5/320.0/4.6 ms

    November 17, 2012 @ 3:56 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 *