I suggest you ...

More powerfull cpu

In my case is more significant the power of a single CPU core than the total number of CPU. (In my current dedicated server I have disabled the hipertheading)

I'm testing you're server in order to transfer a performance critical application I have in a dedicated server. My current bottle neck is on disk io so I thought that your ssd based service will solve my performance issues but:

Although the SSD increases the respond time of the first run of a query, all subsequent queries are CPU bounded and are significant slower than my current non-SSD dedicated server.

854 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    tktk shared this idea  ·   ·  Admin →
    TakeTake shared a merged idea: Double CPU like Linode  ·   · 
    Teshoo LamaTeshoo Lama shared a merged idea: Implement fairer distribution of CPU cores through your price plans  ·   · 
    VevishVevish shared a merged idea: offer additional CPUs for maybe a Dollar more a month on the plans.. after all these are virutual CPUs  ·   · 
    Anonymous shared a merged idea: More cores and/or more memory without extra disk space.  ·   · 
    hustcerhustcer shared a merged idea: Double the cores for every plan  ·   · 
    ShawnShawn shared a merged idea: Add low spec instances with high CPU count.  ·   · 
    DragiDragi shared a merged idea: Increase CPU Cores in Droplets  ·   · 
    xavierxavier shared a merged idea: Better cpus for 512mb plan or Provide swaps  ·   · 
    José Tomás AlbornozJosé Tomás Albornoz shared a merged idea: Lower-end plans with more CPU cores  ·   · 

    63 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • Ted WoodTed Wood commented  · 

        Some people here have brought up the cost of droplets. $5 for a starting price. Cheap right? Well, add in the 20% for backups, and then convert to Canadian (my local currency), and it's no longer a $5 droplet. It's closer to $10 for me. Multiple that by 20 small droplets with limited resources and I'm paying $200 a month. That's far more than I'd pay for one large VPS with generous resources hosting many websites. I no longer want the shared-VPS model for my company. So my point is that the low DigitalOcean pricing actually comes at a significant cost that's not nearly as affordable as it first seems.

      • Ted WoodTed Wood commented  · 

        I've tested out DigitalOcean for a year before bringing over the rest of my sites. I finished transferring the last of the sites (20 of them) in August, but I've been experiencing several server outages lately. This is likely due to PHP+Nginx not having enough memory to handle the load from some of these sites. Digital Ocean held well during my evaluation and then has not been providing the value that was initially seen. Now I'm faced with doubling my hosting costs just to avoid outages. Not exactly the experience that I was expecting.

        I've been evaluating competing services, mainly Vultr and RamNode, for some of the higher-traffic sites that are experiencing problems. RamNode in particular offers more CPU for less cost than DigitalOcean. I hope that DigitalOcean can keep their droplets competitively priced to keep my sites here.

      • Ted WoodTed Wood commented  · 

        One way to work around the low number of cores is to set up multiple droplets with Private Networking... one for application, one for database, one for memory-based caching, etc. That way, $15 gets you 3 cores to serve your site, for example. By moving away from the "one server does it all" mindset, you can actually get tremendous value and performance from DO's 1-core plans.

      • Ted WoodTed Wood commented  · 

        I was excited to be moving my entire business to Digital Ocean away from a Rackspace reseller. I thought the price-per-droplet would be better than what I am currently using. I failed to look closely at the CPU count of each server. Despite sites being faster under light load when running on DO droplets, things begin to change drastically once there's a heavier load compared to my previous hosting. I peg this at the CPU difference. My previous production server (20GB HHD, 500MB RAM, and 4 cores), vs only 1 core at Digital Ocean. I would actually need to spend more per month at Digital Ocean to get the same 4 cores. I take full responsibility for overlooking the CPU performance, as I thought that DigitalOcean was a dream come true. Some dreams are too good to be true, I guess. :) I'll continue my migration to DO in hopes that they strike a better balance of price-per-core. I don't need to massive RAM and SSD that comes with the high-core servers.

      • Mikhail KolesnikMikhail Kolesnik commented  · 

        Is there any proof that DO's single core is much slower than Linode's 8 on some popular web stack? UnixBench actually gave me the impression that DO is overall faster despite of the number of cores. At the end it does not matter much if you have one or 32 cores if that single CPU is really fast.

      • Anonymous commented  · 

        It's a good idea to increase CPU ...I didn't use Linode, but, even so, I would want DO to do it.

      • Zachary DuBoisZachary DuBois commented  · 

        Haydrion, completely false. I payed +$300/m on Linode for 7 VPSs. They were slow as hell. I now have much more resources and speed on DigitalOcean than linode and almost a third of the price. Not to meantion that they are much faster with the SSD and the CPU DigitalOcean does.

      • HaydrionHaydrion commented  · 

        It is also annoying that people are like to do the Linode vs Digital Ocean topics, digi is new, Linode is here for years. They are leading and that will always be how much Digital Ocean is trying to do, they will never get the level of Linode

      • HaydrionHaydrion commented  · 

        Linode is just better than Digital Ocean ! End of Story ! Why you pay more by Linode is because on Linode you have more freedom than by Digital Ocean. $5 for a VPS .. serious .. don't expect amazing things or even better things that you have by Linode

      • Evandro CamargoEvandro Camargo commented  · 

        Well, maybe they could keep the current plans (for those of us who actually fit into it.) and make the "custom" plans at fair prices (not only fair to customers but to their infrastructure too.).

        That way we have what we want and they get what they need to not overwhelm the structure and still provide everyone with a reliable level of service.

      • Zachary DuBoisZachary DuBois commented  · 

        Problem is, Linode is prioritized CPU not the awesome DigitalOcean CPU. No +1 from me :/

      • Bob MonteverdeBob Monteverde commented  · 

        I would assume this would be tricky to implement. It would be much harder to divide of server resources. Would like to hear from someone at DO about this, I'm sure they have put quite some thought into it. From a user perspective it would be ideal to choose RAM, HD Storage, Cores, and Bandwidth independently.... but again, probably a very hard thing to do from their perspective.

      • Bob MonteverdeBob Monteverde commented  · 

        While this would be amazing, it may not be practical at the current cost. On the other hand, I find it very useful to have at least 2 [v]CPUs per a droplet. Having to pay for a $20 a month droplet, when I don't need the extra RAM is a little steep.

        I would be more than happy if you just gave the 1 GB plan 2 cores. It makes sense to keep the 512mb plan 1 core.

        I suppose there is still an issue with the larger plans having few cores, but my vote still is to just boost the 1gb plan to 2 cores.

      • Teshoo LamaTeshoo Lama commented  · 

        The way CPU cores scale through your price plans penalises your bigger customers. At things stand, Bitcoin miners pay $5 per core, while on the 8GB plan we're paying $20 per core. I understand you're primarily competing on RAM, but charging 4x more per core is just extreme.

      • Rodrigo SandovalRodrigo Sandoval commented  · 

        I really want to move to DO, but at this point is useless with the current configurations, I understand the whole thing about pricing and everything else, but being able to create your own droplet with custom resources sounds better than being forced to have 160Gb of HDD when you don't need it, or 16Gb of RAM, when I only need 8 cores and 2Gb of RAM

      • Anonymous commented  · 

        I think increasing ram would be better from 512 to 728 or something.

      • VincentVincent commented  · 

        From what I see on Linode, you are on a server with cpu with 8 physical core but you have access to 1 virtual core like Digital Ocean.

      • JeffreyJeffrey commented  · 

        Linode is more expensive, so don't expect DigitalOcean to double the amount of cores without charging you more. It doesn't just work like that.

      • Simon WestSimon West commented  · 

        Linode also seems to be considerably more expensive than Digital Ocean.

      ← Previous 1 3 4

      Feedback and Knowledge Base