Slicehost vs Linode
Popularity Report
 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rank
URL Tag Cloud
Bookmark History
Saved by 5 people (0 private), first by anonymouse user on 2008-11-27
- Kooala on 2009-08-28 - Tags slicehost , linode , VPS
- Kazuya on 2009-02-24 - Tags hosting , vps , from_delicious
- Fcaballero on 2008-11-29 - Tags Web , linux , infrastructure , VPS
- Olifante on 2008-11-27 - Tags slicehost , linode , memory , comparison , vps , benchmark
- Mikrub on 2008-11-26 - Tags General
Public Sticky notes
I discovered something annoying about Slicehost: they use x86_64 servers, which, per se, doesn't really matter to me - I use open source code that can run on any number of architectures. The problem is that this particular architecture uses more memory than plain old x86. Significantly more.
Highlighted by olifante
I don't really know what sort of response times, uptime, and all that either Slicehost or Linode have, so there are potentially some big intangibles there that are not quite as easy to draw pretty charts for.
Highlighted by olifante
I liked Slicehost's simplicity more - Linode gives you more options, but they're a bit fiddly and cluttered feeling at times.
Highlighted by olifante
we get x86 taking up 77% the memory that x86_64 does.
Highlighted by olifante
"Virtual Private Server" systems, or simply VPS's, got a bad name in the past because they were "overbooked" - too many virtual servers competing for the same CPU resources on one machine. Slicehost and Linode both look like they want to avoid that kind of bad reputation, and so far all the systems I have used have felt snappy and responsive.
Highlighted by olifante
when we factor in the relative prices, Linode comes out ahead, again:
Highlighted by olifante
Public Comment