Dedicated Vs VPS

**PXN** · February 7th, 2010, 12:25 PM

Question and your opinion:

If you have only 1 or 2 adult site, that use very minimal cpu resources say 1 ST or TGPX and 1 Trade script per site and say 4-5TB of Bandwidth/month total, would this work on a VPS if the VPS allocate 2GB of RAM on a Quad Xeon, and guarantee that much bandwidth?

I understand the diff between dedicated and vps, but sometimes I question if you actually need a dedicated server for sites that is low in resource but high in bandwidth need. Because I like the idea of diversify my sites to different host, I do not want to put all my sites in one large basket, which I understand can sometimes be cheaper.

But realizing if you can save 30-40% if hosted some site on a VPS rather than dedicated server, this may be something I would consider.

**FrozenJag** · February 7th, 2010, 12:27 PM

Originally Posted by PXN

Question and your opinion:

If you have only 1 or 2 adult site, that use very minimal cpu resources say 1 ST or TGPX and 1 Trade script per site and say 4-5TB of Bandwidth/month total, would this work on a VPS if the VPS allocate 2GB of RAM on a Quad Xeon, and guarantee that much bandwidth?

I understand the diff between dedicated and vps, but sometimes I question if you actually need a dedicated server for sites that is low in resource but high in bandwidth need. Because I like the idea of diversify my sites to different host, I do not want to put all my sites in one large basket, which I understand can sometimes be cheaper.

But realizing if you can save 30-40% if hosted some site on a VPS rather than dedicated server, this may be something I would consider.

Not sure. Give it a try and find out. Thats the only sure fire way to know.

If it doesnt work out then quickly have your host move you onto a dedicated box.

**facialfreak** · February 7th, 2010, 03:00 PM

A VPS will do fine if the consideration is bandwidth as opposed to server resources ...

The only possible advantage a true dedicated server would have over a VPS would be resources such as processor and disk I/O.

Although I cannot speak for other hosting outfits, we use very capable quad core Xeon and i7 processors in our VPS machines, as well as software RAID10 and obscene amounts of RAM, so many of our VPS plans have as good - and in some cases better - resource availability compared to an entry level dedicated server.

We do have some clients who do not need an overly powerful dedicated server, opting for a VPS setup, because of the benefits that burstable RAM, multi-disk RAID, and the more powerful processor(s) and powerful backup solutions affords them.

VPS platforms continue to become more and more refined to almost the perfect hosting solution for many users.

**SamanthaF** · February 8th, 2010, 06:32 AM

If you're buying a VPS, bear in mind they require some technical knowledge, although some come preinstalled with a control panel such as cpanel, directadmin or plesk.

**drogers** · February 8th, 2010, 10:27 AM

You sound like a great candidate for VPS, since your resource usage is low.

However, at 4-5TB bandwidth you might actually save more by going with a dedicated server. Many hosts give the hardware practically free with a 15-20Mbps commit (which is about where your at) and most VPS plans bill by GB usage, since GB billing usually doesn't work to the customer advantage as well as Mbps 95% billing and you want to get the most bang for the buck on the bandwidth your going to use.

**MMarko** · February 9th, 2010, 05:16 AM

Originally Posted by PXN

Question and your opinion:

If you have only 1 or 2 adult site, that use very minimal cpu resources say 1 ST or TGPX and 1 Trade script per site and say 4-5TB of Bandwidth/month total, would this work on a VPS if the VPS allocate 2GB of RAM on a Quad Xeon, and guarantee that much bandwidth?

I understand the diff between dedicated and vps, but sometimes I question if you actually need a dedicated server for sites that is low in resource but high in bandwidth need. Because I like the idea of diversify my sites to different host, I do not want to put all my sites in one large basket, which I understand can sometimes be cheaper.

But realizing if you can save 30-40% if hosted some site on a VPS rather than dedicated server, this may be something I would consider.

VPS is in fact meant for cases like yours.

**Spudstr** · February 11th, 2010, 04:45 PM

Originally Posted by MMarko

VPS is in fact meant for cases like yours.

We have a few vps's pushing 100-200Mbps.. I'd say VPS's have came a long way, and totaly depends on the setup and how the company runs them.

**PXN** · February 12th, 2010, 12:48 AM

Originally Posted by Spudstr

We have a few vps's pushing 100-200Mbps.. I'd say VPS's have came a long way, and totaly depends on the setup and how the company runs them.

Good to know.

**MMarko** · February 14th, 2010, 06:13 PM

Originally Posted by Spudstr

We have a few vps's pushing 100-200Mbps.. I'd say VPS's have came a long way, and totaly depends on the setup and how the company runs them.

Well you can have shared account pushing that much (same as you can have dedicated server barely pushing 10mbps) but it's just not meant for that. I was talking about general offers he can usually find online.

Thread: Dedicated Vs VPS

Thread Tools

Dedicated Vs VPS

Posting Permissions