Show HN: Server Hunter – Easily browse over 11,000 VPS and Dedicated Servers
serverhunter.com
serverhunter.com
So it would be great if you could filter for that on serverhunter to paint a fair(er) picture, because a few hosters give dedicated cores by default.
When we tried benchmarks on the Hetzner Cloud we found that some servers had as low as 10% max CPU on a crowded host server, which makes sense as to why they charge 8 times more for dedicated CPU cores.
Even with the same provider, there can be massive differences between VPSs, it just depends whether you end up on an idle host node with no noisy neighbors or one where everyone is busy mining their favorite cryptocurrency.
Regardless, we do understand the need for accurate performance numbers, so this is something we will explore further in the near future.
If you have any ideas, please let me know. :)
I think it's safe to assume that those that don't have this information available at least somewhere, are shared cores by default?
You'll see that while the amount CPU cores will usually be less, they are dedicated to you and not shared with other VPSs.
Hope this helps! :)
And yes,they are cheap and they are very reliable, we use them a lot.
Go with Xen or KVM and avoid all that.
- Improved search results display on mobile
- Smarter text searches
- New filter: BGP Sessions
- Badges for 'Annual billing' and 'NAT IPv4'
- Separate page for "Write a review"
- Preserving newlines in reviews
- Added a new "Price per specification" option to sorting and columns
- Added a graph with pricing history in offer's page
- Ability to save your favorite searches
- Added offers from several providers
Our VPS giveaway is ending soon, join now for a chance to win a VPS subscription for one year. Enter here: https://www.serverhunter.com/giveaway.
Incredible how many DCs can't seem to figure this out.
With IPv6, the information from the provider is usually limited to "IPv6: yes/no", if they even mention it. The actual IPv6 space varies wildly from /48 to /56 and /64 - some providers even offer just tunnels or 10 IPv6 addresses. Since this is usually not mentioned on their website, we can't actually distinguish between them either. :(
Though I think there is a more important thing to note here: Maybe you should explicitly support handling of unknown values in the UI? Failure to do so is IMO one of the biggest problems of most specialized search sites.
Sure, there are attributes that cannot always be determined reliably if at all--but instead of either ignoring the attribute completely or forcing it to "false" or "true", or some other explicit value, why not allow the user to specify whether entries for which the attribute is unknown should be shown? That way, if my requirement is proper IPv6 support, for example, I can decide whether I am in the mood to wade through tons of crap, but still have you filter out all entries for which it is known that proper IPv6 is not supported, or whether I want to ignore those and only look at the (probably more expensive) selection of providers that clearly advertise that their product isn't broken.
Right now we do support unknown attributes, they show up unless explicitly filtered out. For example, a server might have an unknown CPU speed, in which case it will show up in the results unless a CPU speed filter is applied.
Just to make sure we're on the same page, you'd like to see the size of the IPv6 range assigned to the server, correct? Is there any more information you'd like about the IPv6 support?
Thanks again for your feedback. :)
Well, that's somewhat of a chicken and egg problem, though. It's not like those broken networks are actually necessarily good enough for the purpose that people use them for, it's just that noone is even aware that the network setup is broken and that that is the problem they should be fixing.
> Right now we do support unknown attributes, they show up unless explicitly filtered out. For example, a server might have an unknown CPU speed, in which case it will show up in the results unless a CPU speed filter is applied.
That's exactly what I think is broken, in that unknown values are not handled explicitly in the UI, but forced to an explicit value. When I specify "I need at least 2 GHz", say, that says nothing about whether I want to see servers for which you don't know the CPU speed, as such a server very well might have a 5 GHz CPU. All it says is that I don't want to see servers for which you know that the speed is less than 2 GHz. So, you shouldn't make assumptions about whether I want to see those servers, but rather let me choose what to do with them.
Now, I don't know whether this is important for clock speed, but often there are cases where there is a particular attribute that is known for many products to have a value that doesn't fit my needs, so it would be great if you could say "not any products where this attribute has value X" ... except that suddenly half of the remaining candidates vanish, too, because that attribute happens to be unknown for those, which then means you have to do all the filtering by hand after all, instead of using the search/comparison site to weed out 90% of the candidates and then investigating the remaining 10% by hand.
> Just to make sure we're on the same page, you'd like to see the size of the IPv6 range assigned to the server, correct? Is there any more information you'd like about the IPv6 support?
Well, yes, prefix length (or number of addresses for offers that don't even have a prefix, I guess), and I guess whether that prefix can be routed completely to the server, as that is, as ryanlol noted, something many hosters fail to do correctly as well. If you can figure it out (or for providers that are willing to feed you machine-readable data), it would also be useful to know whether the reverse zone of the IPv6 prefix can be delegated.
I trust you've shared it on LowEndTalk. Now: keep it up to date, not slammed with ads, moderated for accuracy, and profitable. Best of luck.
My main feature request would be the ability to filter out specific hosts that I have had bad experiences with or do not trust (perhaps an X by their username when browsing).
Do note that, as with most businesses, it's easy to get bad reviews and difficult to get good reviews. Make sure to check multiple sources of information to make an informed decision. :)
Also, when you use the "reporting" feature, the report seems to get sent, but submitting it clears the "Issue description" field which is then highlighted in red which at first made me think something went wrong... Probably it should just close the modal window after the submission?
The issue with the field being highlighted in red seems to be specific to Firefox, I'll investigate and hope to have this resolved shortly as well.
Thanks for letting us know about these issues. :)
* The server providers do not give out machine-readable data.
* It's difficult to distinguish some details from specifications, such as vCPUs or dedicated cores.
* Promotions and discounts cannot be recognized programmatically.
* There's no reliable way to detect discontinued or withdrawn plans.
Ultimately, people will find the result of their search is either withdrawn or unusable for some reasons, and they still have to purchase the server from a well-known provider... And lurking at lowendtalk.com is still a better way to find a good deal.
Improving the quality of data sounds like a good machine-learning project.
Initially, we started off with static data together with a management panel for hosts to add/edit/delete their offers. As you might have guessed, most providers didn't feel like doing this, and those that did made mistakes entering the data or didn't keep it up to date.
This is why we've put most of our effort into automating the data feeds and getting up to date information. Right now, 60.3% of our offers are automatically retrieved from the provider and kept up to date every 24 hours.
Whenever a provider adds, edits or deletes an offer from their website, it's automatically synced to our website accordingly. We also try to do this for stock, but some providers do not expose this information before ordering.
While I'll freely admit we still have mistakes on our website, I hope that it's still useful in finding the right server for your needs, and appreciate your patience while we keep working on improving it every day. :)
P.S: We have deployed some small scale machine learning and are experimenting with it as we go, but since our knowledge in this field is lacking, progress will be slow.
You'll see providers appear on lowendhosting, and similar sites, as a desperate bid to get more customers. Then they fold.
The site and search experience is fast and I'd love to learn more about how it was built.
I think the more interesting part of the product is going to be the procurement of available servers which I don't have any guesses outside of public API's + web scraping to do that.
We might replace it with something that doesn't require the backend at all, but the URLs will end up quite long if you have a few filters selected.
For now, we figured a short URL is nicer to share with other people. :)
These differences make the comparison a harder. Because in Dedicated you talk Core count, in Cloud VM you talk Thread Count ( vCPU ).
Usually, we rely on our own database for core count and speed, but Vultr doesn't actually mention the CPU model in their API either.
For now, I've hardcoded a fix in our backend and I've contacted Vultr whether they can clear up their API in regards to cores vs threads.
Thanks for letting us know! :)
P.S: Every offer has a "Is some information missing or inaccurate? Let us know!" link at the bottom, in case you find more mistakes.
The other plans are VPSs, which are indeed shared. :)
That aside, this will be useful for figuring out hosting for side projects, thank you for sharing!
And a info on the provider AS or a link to the PeeringDB/looking glass would be nice to have. Other than that a super helpful site, thanks.
We have added AWS Lightsail since the pricing is a bit more straight forward and I'll double check tomorrow if there's anything from GCE and Azure we can add.
On June 2017 they wrote: "Custom ISO - Use our available Windows & FreeBSD or bring your own ISO." (source: https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/116203/vmhaus-new-uk-l...)
I've sent them a message to clarify. :)
I've updated our website accordingly. :)
I've added this as a high priority issue and will update you when I make any progress. I'll also see if we can improve our accessibility testing to avoid this in the future.
Turns out keyboard support was only introduced 10 days ago: https://github.com/leongersen/noUiSlider/issues/724#issuecom...
We have plans to do some more comprehensive accessibility testing in the near future, but in the meantime, please let me know if you come across any other accessibility issues.
Thank you!
In the meantime, you could ping their domain name to get a rough idea (if they don't use CloudFlare or block ICMP) and contact their sales team to see if they can hook you up with something more accurate.
- https://www.linode.com/speedtest - https://www.futurehosting.com/network-test-files/ - https://speed.hetzner.de/ - https://turnkeyinternet.net/speed-test/
Edit: found it as "Graphics Card" :D
For now, you can click the one of the column headers in the middle and change it to to "Billing interval", like this: https://www.serverhunter.com/?search=B3E-305-AF8
On that note- are database systems now able to make better use of ssd's? Most optimizations centered around contiguous storage in hdd era.
#tbody_results > tr:first-child { display:none; }
Do note that our advertisements are not served via a third-party provider, there's no tracking, no chances of malware or rogue JS and they're actual offers from our website based on your search filters.
It would be appreciated if you kept them, but in the end, that's entirely up to you. :)