Vultr Optimized Cloud Compute - General Purpose, Singapore, $30/mo (Their "optimized cloud compute" lineup has dedicated vCPUs, as opposed to their regular plans with fair share vCPUs.)
Vultr Optimized Cloud Compute - CPU Optimized, Singapore, $28/mo. (They're similar; the only difference is in the amount of resources offered. I'd chalk up the lower GB score to a noisy neighbor.)
@nick_ said:
I just noticed that the bandwidth used in both directions is around 90-100 GB every time you yabs. This is not only me and it's normal, right?
@nick_ said:
I just noticed that the bandwidth used in both directions is around 90-100 GB every time you yabs. This is not only me and it's normal, right?
normal for 10G network tests.
Thanks for the clarification! I got it now. I'll be more careful not to yabs randomly on VPSs with small bandwidth at a 10 Gbps port. Otherwise, they would get suspended after several yabs.
@nick_ said:
I just noticed that the bandwidth used in both directions is around 90-100 GB every time you yabs. This is not only me and it's normal, right?
normal for 10G network tests.
Thanks for the clarification! I got it now. I'll be more careful not to yabs randomly on VPSs with small bandwidth at a 10 Gbps port. Otherwise, they would get suspended after several yabs.
yes i almost got suspended within hours of getting new VPS with 750GB bandwidth lol
FABRIC Testbed default spec in WASH location, free for non-profit research purpose.
IPv4 is via experiment interface (ESnet peering); IPv6 is via management interface.
@Mason - is it somehow possible to make the iperf and fio tests less CPU intensive? This exhausts the CPU allocation on some VPSes which ends up giving a skewed GB5 result.
@stevewatson301 said: @Mason - is it somehow possible to make the iperf and fio tests less CPU intensive? This exhausts the CPU allocation on some VPSes which ends up giving a skewed GB5 result.
I can look into that, but I'm not aware of any possible settings that would resolve that. Tests are basically trying to push everything to the max, so any artificial limits would taint the results.
Im curious how the other tests would interfere with GB. Everything is run sequentially, so no tests should be stepping on the others' toes, unless you're saying that the tests are causing the CPU to be throttled by the time the GB test is run, to which, I'd simply suggest to run YABS with only GB first, then run a second time for the disk and network tests. But then I suppose you run into the issue of GB's high CPU usage negatively affecting the other tests afterwards.
@Mason said: unless you're saying that the tests are causing the CPU to be throttled by the time the GB test is run
This is correct. I only raised it in the interest of making the benches more accurate and to not give a skewed result to those relying on YABS.
Perhaps the default iperf3 mode could detect neighbouring servers through IP geolocation and run the test only on these servers, as a way to reduce the CPU usage due to the network bench. fio tests could use the same number of cores as the system, instead of relying on the static values of 4 threads (if I remember correctly, I last looked at this a year ago).
An easier idea could be to simply introduce a 2-3 second pause between each fio and iperf3 test, as a way to prevent skewing. Geekbench internally uses 1 second pauses between each test as a way to prevent thermal throttling, although none of this helps for environments that like to quickly throttle such as the T-family of EC2 instances.
@Mason said: unless you're saying that the tests are causing the CPU to be throttled by the time the GB test is run
This is correct. I only raised it in the interest of making the benches more accurate and to not give a skewed result to those relying on YABS.
Perhaps the default iperf3 mode could detect neighbouring servers through IP geolocation and run the test only on these servers, as a way to reduce the CPU usage due to the network bench. fio tests could use the same number of cores as the system, instead of relying on the static values of 4 threads (if I remember correctly, I last looked at this a year ago).
An easier idea could be to simply introduce a 2-3 second pause between each fio and iperf3 test, as a way to prevent skewing. Geekbench internally uses 1 second pauses between each test as a way to prevent thermal throttling, although none of this helps for environments that like to quickly throttle such as the T-family of EC2 instances.
Got it! I would like to revamp the way iperf servers are selected and move to a more random/dynamic selection trather than using a select few that are constantly used over and over. Maybe some geolocation can be done to smartly select some close by servers. For now, the only option to limit the servers used is the -r flag.
There already is a small wait between iperf tests (only 1 second), which could be increased if it'll be beneficial. No wait between fio tests yet, but can easily throw that in.
VirMach Ryzen Special 384 Tokyo ($17.76 biennially)
768 MB RAM 1 Ryzen 5900X CPU 10 GB NVMe 2 TB bandwidth
I got 2x RAM and bandwidth from a bug report.
AWS c6g.large (dedicated cores), us-west-2, $49/mo + $2.5 GP2 disk + egress fees. Similar to the a1.large I posted earlier, except for better GB scores.
Comments
GreenCloudVPS 9999 Birthday SJC San Jose $99 every 3 years, free first term
link to 9999 RO and 9999 IL benchmarks
We accept Karma donations for the last flan. 🍮 affbrr
GreenCloudVPS 9999 Birthday Special Kansas City, MO $99 every 3 years, first term $0.
Spaceberg.cc - Your favorite Seedbox provider!
@LetMeBeSad which provider is this?
Team push-ups!
It's me
Spaceberg.cc - Your favorite Seedbox provider!
its you at home?
VirMach Ryzen Special 2560 Tokyo
2.5GB RAM 2 core Ryzen 5950X 50GB NVMe 6TB Bandwidth $21.85/year
VirMach 1 Chome 8 7 Fukuzumi, Koto $15/yr
OVH Baremetal Montreal $22/month
Fuck this 24/7 internet spew of trivia and celebrity bullshit.
That would be awesome
. But's it my server located in DC 
Spaceberg.cc - Your favorite Seedbox provider!
GreenCloud BudgetKVMSG-2 Singapore ($25/year)
4 GB RAM 2 CPU 35 GB SSD 750 GB Bandwidth
BuyVM
I:
II:
🇫🇮🇫🇮🇫🇮
AWS ARM a1.large, Oregon, $36.72/mo + $2.5/mo gp2 20GB disk + egress fees
Vultr Optimized Cloud Compute - General Purpose, Singapore, $30/mo (Their "optimized cloud compute" lineup has dedicated vCPUs, as opposed to their regular plans with fair share vCPUs.)
Vultr Optimized Cloud Compute - CPU Optimized, Singapore, $28/mo. (They're similar; the only difference is in the amount of resources offered. I'd chalk up the lower GB score to a noisy neighbor.)
Vultr Cloud Compute (shared vCPU) - AMD High Performance, Tokyo, $72/mo.
Vultr Cloud Compute (shared vCPU) - Intel High Frequency, Tokyo, $96/mo.
VirMach BF-SPECIAL-2021 (tokyo) $9.92/yr
Edit: ipv6 is tunnelbroker
Limewave.net SEAV4GB
`root@home:~# curl -sL yabs.sh | bash
## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ##
Yet-Another-Bench-Script
v2022-08-20
https://github.com/masonr/yet-another-bench-script
## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ##
Wed 02 Nov 2022 08:32:04 AM EDT
Basic System Information:
Uptime : 0 days, 0 hours, 4 minutes
Processor : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2695 v2 @ 2.40GHz
CPU cores : 2 @ 2394.228 MHz
AES-NI : ✔ Enabled
VM-x/AMD-V : ✔ Enabled
RAM : 3.8 GiB
Swap : 0.0 KiB
Disk : 49.8 GiB
Distro : Debian GNU/Linux 11 (bullseye)
Kernel : 5.10.0-8-amd64
fio Disk Speed Tests (Mixed R/W 50/50):
iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv4):
Provider | Location (Link) | Send Speed | Recv Speed
| | |
Clouvider | London, UK (10G) | 1.11 Gbits/sec | 95.4 Mbits/sec
Online.net | Paris, FR (10G) | busy | busy
Hybula | The Netherlands (40G) | 1.07 Gbits/sec | 577 Mbits/sec
Uztelecom | Tashkent, UZ (10G) | 738 Mbits/sec | 88.1 Mbits/sec
Clouvider | NYC, NY, US (10G) | 1.86 Gbits/sec | busy
Clouvider | Dallas, TX, US (10G) | 1.87 Gbits/sec | 253 Mbits/sec
Clouvider | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 1.82 Gbits/sec | 652 Mbits/sec
iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv6):
Provider | Location (Link) | Send Speed | Recv Speed
| | |
Clouvider | London, UK (10G) | 767 Mbits/sec | 140 Mbits/sec
Online.net | Paris, FR (10G) | busy | 82.1 Mbits/sec
Hybula | The Netherlands (40G) | 739 Mbits/sec | 596 Mbits/sec
Uztelecom | Tashkent, UZ (10G) | busy | busy
Clouvider | NYC, NY, US (10G) | 1.29 Gbits/sec | 173 Mbits/sec
Clouvider | Dallas, TX, US (10G) | 1.51 Gbits/sec | 220 Mbits/sec
Clouvider | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 1.94 Gbits/sec | 572 Mbits/sec
Geekbench 5 Benchmark Test:
Test | Value
|
Single Core | 495
Multi Core | 979
Full Test | https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/18385437`
Can anyone tell me how does one paste the yabs properly?
@SLMob
< pre >
YABS output
< /pre>
remove the spaces
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
@SLMob You almost did it right. Use triple backtick instead of 1.
Liga Hosting KVM SSD MINI VPS, Dallas, €4,99/year, first term free.
IPv6 is Route48 Kansas City but it isn't working.
We accept Karma donations for the last flan. 🍮 affbrr
GThost dedi for $20/month
Team push-ups!
@VirMach
Does anyone know why GB5 multicore seems to be the same as the single core?
Team push-ups!
@AlexBarakov AlphaVPS machine
Team push-ups!
10x10x10
Team push-ups!
@Advin 's special LES offer. The GB5 seems to keep going down with each week though. Love it nonetheless!
Team push-ups!
@Abdullah the GB5 seems a bit off for some reason
Team push-ups!
10x10x10 NYC
Team push-ups!
Limewave Communications SEAV4GB $6/month after coupon (I got it for free for 3 months from their giveaway)
Almalinux 9 minimal doesn't have
tarso GB5 failed. After fixing that:I just noticed that the bandwidth used in both directions is around 90-100 GB every time you yabs. This is not only me and it's normal, right?
normal for 10G network tests.
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
Thanks for the clarification! I got it now. I'll be more careful not to yabs randomly on VPSs with small bandwidth at a 10 Gbps port. Otherwise, they would get suspended after several yabs.
yes i almost got suspended within hours of getting new VPS with 750GB bandwidth lol
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
FABRIC Testbed default spec in WASH location, free for non-profit research purpose.
IPv4 is via experiment interface (ESnet peering); IPv6 is via management interface.
We accept Karma donations for the last flan. 🍮 affbrr
BuyVM LUX with Ryzen 5900X but GB5 only 190.
https://dttech.top - Personal Site.
Its GB8 not GB5 @dinhvanlocitvn
Vultr Tokyo 1 core, 1GB RAM, 25GB disk, 2TB transfer $6/month
20$? Gimme the link.
Amadex • Hosting Forums • root.hr
@Amadex sold out rn
Team push-ups!
Which location? I like it.
Amadex • Hosting Forums • root.hr
There's a PR in the repo to add latency/ping to the iperf tests. Is that something you guys would want?
yabs daddy
That would be dope!
Team push-ups!
@Mason - is it somehow possible to make the iperf and fio tests less CPU intensive? This exhausts the CPU allocation on some VPSes which ends up giving a skewed GB5 result.
I can look into that, but I'm not aware of any possible settings that would resolve that. Tests are basically trying to push everything to the max, so any artificial limits would taint the results.
Im curious how the other tests would interfere with GB. Everything is run sequentially, so no tests should be stepping on the others' toes, unless you're saying that the tests are causing the CPU to be throttled by the time the GB test is run, to which, I'd simply suggest to run YABS with only GB first, then run a second time for the disk and network tests. But then I suppose you run into the issue of GB's high CPU usage negatively affecting the other tests afterwards.
yabs daddy
This is correct. I only raised it in the interest of making the benches more accurate and to not give a skewed result to those relying on YABS.
Perhaps the default iperf3 mode could detect neighbouring servers through IP geolocation and run the test only on these servers, as a way to reduce the CPU usage due to the network bench. fio tests could use the same number of cores as the system, instead of relying on the static values of 4 threads (if I remember correctly, I last looked at this a year ago).
An easier idea could be to simply introduce a 2-3 second pause between each fio and iperf3 test, as a way to prevent skewing. Geekbench internally uses 1 second pauses between each test as a way to prevent thermal throttling, although none of this helps for environments that like to quickly throttle such as the T-family of EC2 instances.
Got it! I would like to revamp the way iperf servers are selected and move to a more random/dynamic selection trather than using a select few that are constantly used over and over. Maybe some geolocation can be done to smartly select some close by servers. For now, the only option to limit the servers used is the -r flag.
There already is a small wait between iperf tests (only 1 second), which could be increased if it'll be beneficial. No wait between fio tests yet, but can easily throw that in.
yabs daddy
VirMach Ryzen Special 384 Tokyo ($17.76 biennially)
768 MB RAM 1 Ryzen 5900X CPU 10 GB NVMe 2 TB bandwidth
I got 2x RAM and bandwidth from a bug report.
AWS c6g.large (dedicated cores), us-west-2, $49/mo + $2.5 GP2 disk + egress fees. Similar to the a1.large I posted earlier, except for better GB scores.