VPS Rating

Started by Crevand, Oct 10, 2022, 07:58 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

CrevandTopic starter

To find a suitable VPS, many use different ratings. There is a large number of hosting providers among which users are beginning to choose the right one. But can they be trusted? After all, it is possible that this rating is simply paid for. Therefore, let's try to find a suitable place to choose a VPS.
What do ratings earn?



Rating is usually a separate business/side job that requires maintaining infrastructure and profit for the owner. Therefore, before choosing a rating, you should pay attention to how it earns. If there are no sources of monetization on it, then it is either a hobby project (which is unlikely), or a paid top. Let's look at monetization models.

Paid advertising

A typical way to earn money is to place banners at a fixed price. There is a ready-made price list for placement by time or number of impressions. A higher banner is more expensive. Lower - cheaper.

Advertising by the partner system

The same banner format, but the work model is already more interesting. Most VPS providers have an affiliate program that allows you to receive a percentage of the payment.
Accordingly, the owner of the rating will make a profit from each client who came from this banner. At the same time, it is worth paying attention that it will be more profitable for the owner of such a site to raise the rating of the one who will bring more from the affiliate program.

Promotion in the rating and special marks

Some have the opportunity to get to the top of the rating for a fee. Usually this is just a rise in the ranking without specifying a place. You can also get notes like "Recommend".

They don 't earn

There are also situations when the rating implicitly belongs to some web  hosting provider. Then his company is simply in the first place in the top and the rating is a tool for attracting customers to a particular company.

Advertising networks

The site connects to advertising networks and displays banner ads. This is usually a Yandex or Google network (there may be others). And already they make a profit from clicks / impressions.

Paid accommodation

Sometimes companies need to pay to get into the rating. I have seen this format more often on foreign sites.
Rating rating system

In order not to be too subjective, we will make a rating evaluation system. The criteria will be as follows:

    hosting provider rating system (0 - no, 1 - yes)

    Transparent and understandable evaluation system (0 - no, 1 - yes)

    Availability of a search by VPS characteristics (0 - no, 1 - yes)

    The ability to leave reviews about hosting providers (0 - no, 1 - yes, 2 - with authorization via social networks)

    Availability of technical characteristics assessment (0 - no, 1 - yes)

    Discounts and bonuses from the rating (0 - no, 1 - yes)

    The presence of ads that can confuse the user (0 - yes, 1 - no)

    Availability of information about the owner of the rating (0 - no, 1 - yes)

    Possibility to contact and receive a response from representatives (0 - no, 1 - yes)

    Are there signs of life (0 - no, 1 - yes)

Let's move on to the list of ratings that we will evaluate. These are the most popular resources that are given out in search engines for the queries "vps rating", "top vps", etc.

List:

Hostinghub, Hosting101, Hostings.info, Poiskvps, Vpsup, Hosting fanatic, 101poisk, Siterost, Zapili, Tophosts, Hosters, Tophosting, Testvps, Hostobzor, Vps.today, Hosting-list, Hostdb, Hostgid.net.

1st place: hosting101 and hostings.info

We earned 8 points out of 11. At the same time, the assessment from experts is sometimes not clear hostings.info , since it is difficult to objectively evaluate the hosting provider for a short period of use. And what the expert speaks well about, in user reviews can be indicated as a minus.

2nd place: Hostinghub and hosters

7 points out of 11. HostingHub can be noted for the presence of authorization through social networks, which makes the reviews more reliable. And hosters for taking companies that have existed for more than four years into the rating.

3rd place: vpsup, 101poisk, tophosts, vps.today, hostdb

Earned 6 points out of 11. Only 101poisk of them has a transparent rating system. Vpsup aroused suspicion, since the leader had no negative ratings when writing the article, while everyone else has them. And the whois rating itself is hosted by the leader.

4-5 places: poiskvps, tophosting, hostobzor, hostgid.net , hosting fanatic, testvps

5 and 4 out of 11 points each. Among 4-5 places, only 2 caused misunderstanding. Hosting fanatic has an incomprehensible rating system and it is not clear where hosting gets the first place.
And tophosting has a strange behavior when clicking on non-existent web   hosting providers in the rating (it consistently redirects to one chosen one), as well as too many reviews from the leader, while no one from the users left a review in the evening or at night.
Small conclusions from the study

According to the scores, you can assess the main problems that the ratings are guilty of. This is the presence of advertising that can confuse the user, the lack of data about the owner of the site and the lack of a more objective technical assessment of VPS providers.

I would like to mention the work hostings.info to combat bots. To do this, they require leaving reviews only from live accounts in social networks. networks.

The services poiskvps and vps.today lost two points each due to the lack of a rating system. At the same time, they remain quite good tools for searching for VPS when you know exactly the required characteristics of the server.

Write in the comments how you choose VPS in general, as well as other ratings that we might have missed.
  •  

richardBranson

why try to understand the varieties of shit ?
All hosting providers on all nodes with VPS are overselling and becoming a hostage to the greed of the hosting provider is just stupid.
For most, a regular virtual hosting is very suitable.
Who needs to take a dedicated server / servers.

I use Lowendstock. I don't look at the rating, I just take it cheaper, because I personally took it for myself, and uptime was not important.
  •  

arthyk

Unfortunately, it is quite difficult to get reliable information about a particular hosting service provider using rating services. Naturally, each rating agency (monitoring service) has its own benefit, and the more "serious" such a resource looks, the greater the likelihood of "foul play". Therefore, I personally would recommend getting information about the hosting provider you are interested in from public independent forums, reviews, and answers to questions on independent sites. In general, from real people. ;)
  •  

snowy94

I didn't even notice a word about processor frequencies, only some conditional "cores". You understand that this is almost the most important thing on which the speed of the sites depends. If the hosting provider has 128 cores on the server, then this is only in order to sell it to a larger number of customers, and what's that to you?
Almost any VPS is usually 2-2.5Ghz cores. If more, then they are already asking for completely different money for this. But shared doesn't need to trade cores and, for example, at a 4GHz frequency, sites turn around 2 times faster.

SSD, and now the newfangled NVMe in every advertisement. But again, the host needs the largest possible volume in order to offer visually more favorable tariffs and to divide it for a larger number of customers. And you? It is your site that is most likely neither cold nor hot from 2-3GB/sec with consecutive single access in large blocks, you will not drive movies on your disk. And hundreds of thousands of IOPs are also achieved only due to multiple parallel requests from customers/ neighbors.
All that the average website on the same WordPress wants, for example, is a higher processor frequency, more memory and faster, and more disk operations with random access in small blocks. And the power here is either behind the good old SLC and MLC, or behind the most advanced Optane.
In mass hosting, but, almost universally "optimal" in price / volume TLC / QLC, etc. consumer goods and a clear turn in the wrong direction, towards HDD, and not really to speed and performance. Although under the NVMe label. There the SLC cache ends and that's it, NVMe turns into a pumpkin.

Also, all processor cores are available to you on shared, and they are full-fledged, and not clippings (without AES, for example) as it often happens on VPS. The memory allocated to you is used to the maximum by your sites.
On vps, you also need to spend money on the rest of the operating system and additional. software that will be needed anyway - mail, ftp, maybe some kind of panel, etc.
  •