VPS vs Dedicated Server Performance in real time

It really depends on what your needs are and who your providers are. However the difference between vps and dedicated is that with dedicated you are the only person with files on the server while VPS is a virtualization environment where everyone gets root access inside a virtual machine, but there are multiple people with these VMs on one given physical server.
If you are comfortable managing your sites in a VPS as root, then it won't be any more difficult to manage them on a dedicated server.
 
It really depends on what your needs are and who your providers are. However the difference between vps and dedicated is that with dedicated you are the only person with files on the server while VPS is a virtualization environment where everyone gets root access inside a virtual machine, but there are multiple people with these VMs on one given physical server.
If you are comfortable managing your sites in a VPS as root, then it won't be any more difficult to manage them on a dedicated server.

Very well said :D
 
In my opinion, dedicated servers are the better option. They are better in terms of memory usage and bandwidth.
Take the scenario Conor dicsussed referencing memory - a VPS with 2GB of dedicated memory that can burst versus a dedicated server with 2GB of memory that can't burst - which is better in terms of memory usage? Where do you set the baseline for comparison?
 
VPS Slo

That is true for the most part. However, if another VPS on the host server is compromised and launches a DoS attack that uses the NIC in it's entirety, that would most definitely have a negative impact on your VPS. We've had it happen once or twice and it wreaks havoc until the IDS can kick in and let us know what's going on. In addition, if the VPS Host Server itself is compromised, there's a good chance you can say goodbye to all the VM accounts. Now that would suck. :help:

This is very true. We use a VPS and sometimes our sites/applications really slow down. Remember if your host has one big 16GB dual CPU Server with say 4 disks in a RAID conf BUT has 16 VPS environments all possibly running multiple sites in those environments then there us a lot of disk activity. Those disks can only read and write certain amounts of data no matter what.

We are suffering slow speed on our sites from heavy bandwidth and disk activity from other VPS users. One of our VPS is idle much of the time and runs pretty fast, but sometimes we suffer slow speeds in those idles times because of the hardware activity. VPS environments are great, but they cannot allocate you dedicated resources on the NIC and disks (OpenVZ for certain) so you will suffer performance issues if others on the node are hogging!

In my opinion and testing, dedicated servers are much better and perform better consequently in line with our apps. VPS are cheap, quick and easy to setup.

With a dedicated server it means just that its all yours. Although VPS you get all your own software and environment and you share hardware. Anything that you share means slower.
 
This all depends on that is virtualizing the servers and what hardware is used. If you are using fiberchannel SAN's and big servers you can have a VPS running like a dedicated server performance wise.
 
Surely everyone would think costly dedicated servers will perform better than VPS BUT...

I experimented with both on MyHosting and from my experience, high end VPS packages were better than the low cost dedicated servers.

Just from my observations of course. They also answered my questions regarding pricing and VPS pricing was really attractive.
 
It is fully dependent on how it has been set up and how well optimized it is. It A VPS is well setup then it can easily out preform most low end dedicated servers.
 
I agree with IfusionAlistair.
I have a very power VPS and it runs much better then my previous dedicated server. but still I liked the dedicated server!
 
Back
Top