Z.COM Singapore Cloud Host KVM VPS Host SSD Hard Drive IO Performance Speed ​​Experience Simple Evaluation

I have to say that in the past few days, there has been discussion about the registration of the high-end domain name Z.COM owned by GMO, which will give away 2,000 yen, which can be directly used to register domain names, purchase virtual hosts, cloud vps and other services. On the previous day A simple evaluation record of his Japanese node vps host (Z.COM Japanese cloud host KVM VPS host performance and speed experience simple evaluation), the telecommunications speed is a bit lacking, currently this site is using another Japanese node from Conoha, a subsidiary of GMO , using CDN service. Now let’s try out its Singapore node to see if it is faster than Japan’s as some partners said?

First, Singapore basic configuration plan

• CPU: 2 core CPU
• Memory: 1024MB
• Hard drive: 50GB SSD
• Traffic: 2T
• Architecture: KVM
• Number of IPs: 1 independent IP
• Price: 1170 yen/month (purchase)

Second, host configuration and network download file speed

Benchmark started on Sat Nov 21 21:07:47 SGT 2015
Full benchmark log: /root/bench.log
System Info
----------
Processor: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2660 v3 @ 2.60GHz
CPU Cores: 2
Frequency: 2599.996 MHz
Memory: 1006 MB
Swap: 2015 MB
Uptime: 24 minutes,

OS: CentOS release 6.6 (Final)
Arch: i686 (32 Bit)
Kernel: 2.6.32-504.16.2.el6.i686
Hostname: host-163-44-155-174
Speedtest (IPv4 only)
--------------------------
Your public IPv4 is 163.44.***.***

Location Provider Speed
CDN Cachefly 18.1MB/s

Atlanta, GA, US Coloat 7.71MB/s
Dallas, TX, US Softlayer 3.48MB/s
Seattle, WA, US Softlayer 10.0MB/s
San Jose, CA, US Softlayer 10.4MB/s
Washington, DC, US Softlayer 4.14MB/s

Tokyo, Japan Linode 15.8MB/s
Singapore Softlayer 12.2MB/s

Rotterdam, Netherlands id3.net 2.40MB/s
Haarlem, Netherlands Leaseweb 11.0MB/s
Disk Speed
----------
I/O (1st run): 672 MB/s
I/O (2nd run): 1.2 GB/s
I/O (3rd run): 1.3 GB/s
Average I/O: 224.833 MB/s

The same CPU E5-2660 v3 @ 2.60GHz

Third, MTR route tracing test

Fourth, PING speed test

It is true that telecommunications lines perform much better than China Unicom and China Mobile lines, and they are almost directly connected!

Fifth, hard disk IO performance test

[root@host-163-44-155-174 ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=4k oflag=dsync
4096+0 records in
4096+0 records out
268435456 bytes (268 MB) copied, 6.20153 s, 43.3 MB/s
[root@host-163-44-155-174 ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=8k count=256k conv=fdatasync
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 3.43377 s, 625 MB/s

Sixth, UnixBench simple test

# # # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # #
# # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # # #
# # # # # # ## ##### ##### # # # # ######
# # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # #
# # # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # #
#### # # # # # ##### ###### # # #### # #

Version 5.1.3 Based on the Byte Magazine Unix Benchmark

Multi-CPU version Version 5 revisions by Ian Smith,
Sunnyvale, CA, USA
January 13, 2011 johantheghost at yahoo period com
1 x Dhrystone 2 using register variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 x Double-Precision Whetstone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1xExeclThroughput 1 2 3

1 x File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 1 2 3

1 x File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1 2 3

1 x File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1 2 3

1 x Pipe Throughput 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 x Pipe-based Context Switching 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 x Process Creation 1 2 3

1 x System Call Overhead 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 x Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 1 2 3

1 x Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1 2 3

2 x Dhrystone 2 using register variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2 x Double-Precision Whetstone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2xExeclThroughput 1 2 3

2 x File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 1 2 3

2 x File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1 2 3

2 x File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1 2 3

2 x Pipe Throughput 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2 x Pipe-based Context Switching 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2 x Process Creation 1 2 3

2 x System Call Overhead 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2 x Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 1 2 3

2 x Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1 2 3

================================================== ======================
BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.3)

System: cnh.hhdd.net: GNU/Linux
OS: GNU/Linux -- 3.10.0-229.el7.x86_64 -- #1 SMP Fri Mar 6 11:36:42 UTC 2015
Machine: x86_64 (x86_64)
Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="UTF-8", collate="UTF-8")
CPU 0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2660 v3 @ 2.60GHz (5200.0 bogomips)
x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET
CPU 1: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2660 v3 @ 2.60GHz (5200.0 bogomips)
x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET
18:26:03 up 5 min, 1 user, load average: 0.31, 0.09, 0.03; runlevel 3

-------------------------------------------------- -----------------------
Benchmark Run: Fri Nov 20 2015 18:26:03 - 18:54:08
2 CPUs in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests

Dhrystone 2 using register variables 30283863.4 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Double-Precision Whetstone 3817.8 MWIPS (9.7 s, 7 samples)
Execl Throughput 2284.8 lps (29.6 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 1028210.5 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 277531.0 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 2616928.7 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Pipe Throughput 1523186.0 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Pipe-based Context Switching 278291.9 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Process Creation 5430.2 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 5195.2 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1267.3 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples)
System Call Overhead 2282358.6 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)

System Benchmarks Index Values ​​BASELINE RESULT INDEX
Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 30283863.4 2595.0
Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 3817.8 694.2
ExeclThroughput 43.0 2284.8 531.3
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 1028210.5 2596.5
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 277531.0 1676.9
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 2616928.7 4511.9
Pipe Throughput 12440.0 1523186.0 1224.4
Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 278291.9 695.7
Process Creation 126.0 5430.2 431.0
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 5195.2 1225.3
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 1267.3 2112.2
System Call Overhead 15000.0 2282358.6 1521.6
========
System Benchmarks Index Score 1316.8

-------------------------------------------------- -----------------------
Benchmark Run: Fri Nov 20 2015 18:54:08 - 19:22:14
2 CPUs in system; running 2 parallel copies of tests

Dhrystone 2 using register variables 62474378.9 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Double-Precision Whetstone 7852.8 MWIPS (9.9 s, 7 samples)
Execl Throughput 7152.7 lps (29.8 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 1727294.4 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 452147.4 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 3898374.8 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Pipe Throughput 3177173.0 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Pipe-based Context Switching 600024.1 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Process Creation 18968.0 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 8697.3 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 1437.0 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples)
System Call Overhead 3649036.9 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)

System Benchmarks Index Values ​​BASELINE RESULT INDEX
Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 62474378.9 5353.4
Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 7852.8 1427.8
ExeclThroughput 43.0 7152.7 1663.4
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 1727294.4 4361.9
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 452147.4 2732.0
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 3898374.8 6721.3
Pipe Throughput 12440.0 3177173.0 2554.0
Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 600024.1 1500.1
Process Creation 126.0 18968.0 1505.4
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 8697.3 2051.3
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 1437.0 2395.1
System Call Overhead 15000.0 3649036.9 2432.7
========
System Benchmarks Index Score 2534.3

Summary: The running score is better than that of Japanese nodes, and the Singapore Telecom line is also better than the Japanese line. It depends on your own users to make the choice. Choosing the Singapore line is more than 200 yen more expensive than the Japanese line! His company mainly builds websites. Regarding personal Internet access, it is estimated that in the future, personal Internet access ports will be blocked like Conoha! Traffic is currently restricted. According to the official introduction, accounts will not be blocked indiscriminately, but we don’t know what will happen if a large number of users check in. Judging from the current test results, the resources are still relatively abundant. All configurations and interfaces are the same as those of Conoha. Even the price and panel settings are no different.

Recommended site searches: free mainland China space, website registration domain name query, Beijing domain name registration, registered domain name, IP address query, server rental Hong Kong server rental 99idc, good domain name registration, domain name price, virtual host rental