Rapidspeeds Gbit NL review/discussion

Doesn't seem to be one of these yet so I'll just make it :)

I've had it (4GB 1TB version) for about 48 hours now, so far nothing that impressive. Download hit 45MB/s from a 85GB SCC pack with plenty of peers. Upload on 6 small public torrents (TV shows) isn't going above 12MB/s, definitely lack of BW (5Gbps per rack of 35 servers =~140Mbit each roughly)

However, given it is all new, everyone is thrashing the connection so perhaps in a few more days it will settle down a bit. For the price, still very decent for unmetered 100Mbit LW.

So far haven't tested file up/down speeds, will test that shortly once the torrent BW stops being capped.

Be it NL or OVH or any other country, 99 pounds for an unmetered 1000Mbps server is too low for good speeds, your download seems to be fine for a shared line remember SCC has all ovh boxes and OVH -> anywhere in the world outside of ovh is basically crappy routing so i would say 45MB/sec is fine to download

check ftp with another NL/OVH and see what you get with a single thread, that should give you a better indicator. Test upload via ftp too and also on private trackers with a lot of leechers and few seeders to get the best indicator. Never ever rely on public torrents (they are the worst for indicating speeds)

I just realized you are on ovh forums too LOL :P the amount of bitching there that goes on is amazing (i am there too). Was flipping out on internal bw being counted a week ago.

I did check via SCP and the total speed stayed at 12MB/s, it just stole 3 from the torrents. Public torrents are perfectly fine for testing, you are wrong about them being worse since private sites rarely have a lack of upload. But either which way, it is so consistently 12MB/s it is obviously being capped somewhere.

I've done all the maths and 99GBP for Gbit isn't too bad, they can easily deliver 200Mbit or more without a problem (normally anyway, perhaps not in the first few weeks of this new setup), so in that regard it isn't too bad. But not seeing much more than this, would be better off with a SP mini unmetered version.

I'll update this thread as time goes on, for a little last night I was 15MB/s but it has dropped down again.

Well ask rapidspeeds why it is maxing out at only 12-15MB/sec it could be the set up it could be BW rapeage

There is a thread open on their forum maybe post something there so they can see it and answer questions there.

And others that have the servers can see what is going on with them

Why are you two treating me like a noob? This isn't a help thread, it is a review/discussion thread. I know perfectly well why it is maxing out there, and I have a ticket open and they are working on it as it is a general problem.

Perhaps you should take notice I run a seedbox company, and therefore know everything there is to know about this and probably don't need your advice....

A guy at the RS forums is claiming his HDD is showing as "VMware Virtual Disk"
Is the 1TB model (D-1000) a real physical server or a VMware VPS?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thelen

Why are you two treating me like a noob?

Perhaps you should take notice I run a seedbox company, and therefore know everything there is to know about this and probably don't need your advice....

---

Arrogance FTW.

I don't see that anywhere, where did he see it?

It performs far to well to be a VPS, it would have to be the bigger 2x1TB 8GB server with dual quad core split into only 2 users to be anywhere even close and even then only if the other person wasn't doing anything, which isn't the case.

heiska why don't you contribute something instead of being a total asshat troll?

This is the exact attitude why noone wants to help you out when your server got hacked on OVH forums..noone was treatign you like a noob people are merely chipping in ideas..and helping u..big deal if you run a seedbox company..so do many others and do a much better job than you..you want to be arrogant so can everyone else be.

heiska said exactly what he had to..your language is rubbish and immature to say the least..when people are actually involved in discussions be it offering help or reviewing you have issues and then you have issues when people say the truth. grow up kiddo.

/end rant and gtfo :)

You do realise that thread was completely facetious right? I never expected anyone to help, it was all for teh lulz of seeing what reasons people could come up with for posting. I'm glad you think my posts, which are full of proper grammar and punctuation vs your drivel, is immature, as it shows your complete lack of maturity and rationality.

Seems the standard response on forums is either deliberately trolling, or posting with such arrogance and "zomg I score 25:3 on halo so I'm 1337 and know everything" that it seems the same, and this thread is no different. You might have actually stood a chance to look intelligent if you said something related to the discussion, rather than participating in the mutual blow-jobery between the trolls in the thread.

On to more sane posting, I've done a bunch more testing. Download FROM OVH to RS, did 40MB/s for about 5 seconds then dropped to about 15, then 6 by the end of the 600MB file. The reverse, all of about 350KB/s. Download FROM hostnoc to RS, did full 100Mbit, reverse the basically the same. From random other Gbit file mirrors in EU, barely hit more than 20MB/s down, couldn't test up obviously but it definitely wasn't a stable connection as the speed fluctuated heaps.

Claiming you "know everything there is to know" is arrogant. I think hes referring to your signature. It's almost impossible for an operator of a competing seedbox company to impartially review any other seedbox company. I think you'll get a lot of antagonism based on that.

As the operator of a seedbox company you've got the burden of proving your credibility beyond that of a normal user in this situation. Automatically assuming X company sucks meanwhile surreptitiously promoting your own is called astroturfing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spiridonov

A guy at the RS forums is claiming his HDD is showing as "VMware Virtual Disk"
Is the 1TB model (D-1000) a real physical server or a VMware VPS?

---

There was an answer in that thread now on that.. all the servers run esxi apparently (but are true dedi's)

I got no idea what you are smoking lmn8r, but rapidspeeds are NOT a seedbox company, they are a dedicated server company. Whether or not I run a seedbox company has nothing to do with my 'review'; i could easily just be a biased normal person and post a bad/good/whatever review.... Saying "It's almost impossible for an operator of a competing seedbox company to impartially review any other seedbox company. I think you'll get a lot of antagonism based on that." is stupid as well. Clearly seedbox users are going to be biased, they might just lack the financial motivation to be biased, but they are certainly still biased.

Saying I have the burden of proof for credibility BECAUSE I run a seedbox company is just stupid too. Do astronauts who have gone to space have to prove they know how to put on a space suit? That's just stupid... Likewise is "Claiming you "know everything there is to know" is arrogant." Claiming someone doesn't know all there is to know because they run a seedbox company, while you yourself can't even compile rtorrent, is beyond stupid. You are just embittered because you bought some cheapass seedbox and didn't get delivered because the provider was a 15yo scamming for money so he could buy gold in WoW.

Rilly if they all run esxi, that is possibly the problem, and completely and utterly stupid. Advertising as dedicated if it is virtualised (even such that it is only 1 user per server still), completely wrong. Though, all my torrent testing has shown similar results to all my other test servers, as a minimum guide, but the issue isn't that, it is exceeding the 15MB/s or so upload.

When logic fails, use insults. I sure hope someone else does the customer support for your company :dry:

As in you displayed any logic? Lulz...

I do the customer support, and I treat the customers well, who treat me well. Those who complain that they aren't getting 500MB/s from their shared Gbit slot or any number of other stupid assumptions, or plain thinking they have a clue about how to setup a read-only FTP/SCP user or anything like that, promptly get the hard line.

I don't need smartass dickweeds like you for customer, you always take 100x as much energy to keep happy, and often ruin it for everyone else (eg using it for 29 days, doing paypal dispute on the last and thinking to get away with it (which btw you don't, 14 disputes and not one refund yet from people trying to scam like this)). If you think you have the zen touch, perhaps you should start a seedbox company, since by your logic I can't possibly have any customers due to my insults...

Bottom line is, I've yet to see much more than 15MB/s outgoing from this server, or more than 45MB/s incoming, and frankly that is pretty poor performance however you cut it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thelen

Rilly if they all run esxi, that is possibly the problem, and completely and utterly stupid. Advertising as dedicated if it is virtualised (even such that it is only 1 user per server still), completely wrong. Though, all my torrent testing has shown similar results to all my other test servers, as a minimum guide, but the issue isn't that, it is exceeding the 15MB/s or so upload.

---

The reason they stated they run esxi is: (from their website)
Servers are managed by a vSphere system that controls bandwidth split between racks and will guarantee each server has a minimum of 200Mbps at all times, burstable upto 1Gbps - this system will also control the manager mentioned above - all resources (cpu, ram & hdd's are dedicated - nothing is shared with any other users).

not that i'm saying its related to any of the speed discussions though... :)

Not sure where that is, I've searched their whole site at time of writing and can't see that. Is it on the forums perhaps?

I don't understand the reason they use/think they need to use ESXI on the servers, any managed switch 10 years old can manage bandwidth allocation no problem....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thelen

Not sure where that is, I've searched their whole site at time of writing and can't see that. Is it on the forums perhaps?

I don't understand the reason they use/think they need to use ESXI on the servers, any managed switch 10 years old can manage bandwidth allocation no problem....

---

https://rapidspeeds.com/dedicatedservers.html

Just below the plans offered

Brb, imma go get a wicker basket and some rope and use Thelen's ego as a hot air balloon.

NP, I'll use your idiocy as an anchor when SS. DickWeed comes into port.

Seriously though, those things weren't on the page about 6 weeks ago when I ordered, so I'm not really sure what they are doing, it certainly wasn't clear back then.

Irregardless, I still have not seen anything more than 100Mbit speed, at most 200Mbit, so at this stage I would have to say they have failed miserably. I'd recommend a plain OVH eg best of for the same price over these. vSphere has it's uses but when they are offering 'dedicated' servers, using that is just a complete lie.

If speeds don't improve I'll be recommending cancellation and refunds, certainly it will be easy enough to get money back due to non-deliverance of their service. What is sad is that they could actually offer all they have promised, clearly they have become greedy and decided to make amazing profit rather than providing a good service.

I think the problem is, they have targeted these new servers at the seedbox users. As thelen said before, they will be getting raped, maybe once people have begun to fill up there drives and slow down with downloading everything that comes out then the average speeds for users will be better.
If they had just targeted them as site servers and other lower bandwidth stuff things would be fine.
Shame about the miss advertising about the esxi thing, seems they have gone the way of OVH with changing stuff without notice. But they did start out as OVH resellers so its prolly rubbed off on them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thelen

Why are you two treating me like a noob? This isn't a help thread, it is a review/discussion thread. I know perfectly well why it is maxing out there, and I have a ticket open and they are working on it as it is a general problem.

Perhaps you should take notice I run a seedbox company, and therefore know everything there is to know about this and probably don't need your advice....

---

Yet you use an encrypted protocol to benchmark the connection?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TLwhore

I think the problem is, they have targeted these new servers at the seedbox users. As thelen said before, they will be getting raped, maybe once people have begun to fill up there drives and slow down with downloading everything that comes out then the average speeds for users will be better.
If they had just targeted them as site servers and other lower bandwidth stuff things would be fine.
Shame about the miss advertising about the esxi thing, seems they have gone the way of OVH with changing stuff without notice. But they did start out as OVH resellers so its prolly rubbed off on them

---

Yup, I am really quite disappointed as I expected their offering to decimate everything! I don't understand why they are doing as they are, all our calculations and quotes from LW have been roughly similar price, and we would make it work, but we have not the 30,000GBP capital to get it going. They have admit in ticket that the problem is both with vSphere and the BW sharing stuff they are doing, so probably will be a while until it is solved. As I said before, doing 100Mbps roughly out for the past week is not BAD for 100GBP, but it certainly isn't Gbit and the limit is definitely network in this instance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by loz_black

Yet you use an encrypted protocol to benchmark the connection?

---

Learn to read, I used FTP SCP HTTP HTTPS and even an rsync and ssh-fs mount.

Quote:

---

Hello

The D1000 Server Orders are closed due to some issues we need to fix before anyone else buys them.

This is being thoroughly investigated by our tech professionals and we shall have updates on this very soon.

Please stay tuned to find out more.

On a good note the Q2000 Servers are selling well and we have had excellent performance feedback.

More updates to come.

Regards

Craig M

---

Anyone here has a Q2000?

Hello,

Ok, so let me explain what is happening.

We have not even been getting 1/4th of the bandwidth available from trunk -> switch -> server because of our vSphere system - we wanted to make it easy for users to install a torrent client, or a ftp, or do a reinstall with just one click - but it's been one problem after another.

We have had enough - we guaranteed every customer 200Mbps minimum and so far we have only delivered around 100Mbps speeds, with high cpu loads & bad disk write speeds which in turn affected the upstream/downstream links to reaching their potential speed.

Also, as everyone is only getting half the service, they are only being charged half the price - we can't be any more fair than that.

We are doing two things which will solve all problems:

1) Completely removing the vSphere system - so every server will be properly dedicated.

2) We are replacing single 1TB disks with 2 x 500GB (this was requested by over 75% of users) which will increase the performance as it's split between two hdds.

Once you see our advertisement on here, that's when you know everything is working perfectly - and perfection is an understatement.

That must suck, you'll have to spend what, another 12,000GBP+ on those 500GBs, or will you just trade/swap them from the 1TB ?

TBH, I'd rather have the TB kept, 2x500GB will mean even more BW used, and for the price you already provide enough. I don't think the 2x500GB will be sustainable, but we'll see I guess.

Well, this has not been updated in a while.

The advert placed on the FST site speaks volumes for the new range :)

Not a single complaint yet.

Yea it has been a bumpy ride and we did make some mistakes by using the whole vSphere program but everything is great now, reduced the prices of the Q2000's and just stopped the D1000's altogether, seems to have done the trick hehe.

More ranges to come ofcourse in the near future.

Regards

Craig M

Well I'm still waiting for my replacement server, having been 3 days now since you scraped more money out of me :P

TBH can't see how everything is working great if there are orders outstanding ;)

Orders being outstanding means alot of orders to go through. Which means the product is popular. Sorry for your wait, we will get it to you asap. Don't worry about your bill obviously it will not start until you get your server.

Regards

Craig M

Well I specifically asked whether it was going to be weeks like the last one, you were a little vague but indicated it would be soon, ie the next few days. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thelen

Well I specifically asked whether it was going to be weeks like the last one, you were a little vague but indicated it would be soon, ie the next few days. :P

---

Got your new the day you posted ^

enjoy bud :)

Yep TY. Though unfortunately it doesn't seem to be much/any better.

From the DRAC it still seems to say it is using ESXi? Can I just get a plain install (or do I have to do that myself, if so no problems).

Thelen, not performing any better? we are sold out then? wheres the compaints from other users on any forum? everyone says how fantastic they are.

I've posted speed results, so have customers... so i'm not even going to bother answering that - if you have a problem contact me via usual routes (Live Chat, Ticket System, IRC, E-Mail, MSN, Skype or Telephone) and have traceroutes/screenshots ready so I can check the peering/transit provider used and change it if necessary.

If it was ESXi would I really give you DRAC? That's an issue with iDRAC6 when a vmware product is installed first - install it yourself if you like, that's why you have it - costs £180 first month with ovh and £40 a month thereafter - so make good use :)

Well I don't actually know didn't look much just from logging in:
System Model PowerEdge R210
System Host Name rs205.rapidspeeds.net
Operating System VMware ESXi 4.0.0 build-261974

Not saying it is, maybe its just a mistake? Anyway, download seems marginally better, but upload out of the server is pretty terrible. To compare to a OVH box (with actually worse specs, 2x750GB instead), the OVH hits the 200Mbit outgoing while this one still has trouble above 150Mbit or so. Perhaps I should do my own install (kindof assumed yours were fast but maybe not). At least unlike last time, wget/scp'ing files seems faster, so maybe it is just deluge.

Hi Thelen,

The Dell R210 is a driver issue, you can download the drivers and update it - takes a few minutes.

KVM over IP access is 100% control of your server - you cant change your bios settings on your ovh server, or install ANY iso you like very easily? or give your server a cold reboot (without doing it from the manager).

Anyways, we are going to make some video tutorials to show you exactly how everything works - although documentation can be found on dell's website.

I honestly don't see how considering how much bandwidth is available - I don't see any other complaints Thelen. If you are talking about JUST TORRENTS of course OVH boxes will be faster considering it's all internal bandwidth....

We are talking about peering/transit to the rest of the world that is faster Thelen - and if you had some users on this box, all punishing it, you would see it shine.

I want you to download a file from an OVH 1Gbps - and then a Rapid 1Gbps ... More than likely the OVH will beat the Rapid box as it's all internal bandwidth (both upload/download) for the first 10/15minutes.

It's after this, when you notice the OVH server slowing right down, the Leaseweb box is still sending at decent speeds - because of this, you will get a much better ratio as you will have less hops to your destination.

^ That's how a Rapid server beats an OVH server in the long run - try it, test with both servers, and look at the ratio after a few hours.

If you use these servers are made for hotfile/fileserve/megashare/turbobit upload servers, streaming server, gaming servers, powerful web hosting, and things like that, you will notice the speeds are fantastic.

Do you need me to login to your box and show you it doing some fantastic speeds to various places?

Also, Thelen - don't you find it strange out of all those servers we've sold, we are not seeing more complaints?

Answering last question first, actually I haven't seen anyone say how great they are, nor how bad (except for 1) so can't really judge either way. And judging from your forum (which has neither either) I'd say people are just 'happy' with them. I didn't mean to imply they were bad per se, just not as good as I thought they would be (being non-OVH). To be fair to you, you seen to have done an OK job, but you by no means have had a trouble-free ride and this perhaps might lead you to feel yourself some of my comments justified? (and hell, you aren't alone. all the major torrent/seedbox providers have serious issues, from Feral and RAID, to Xirvik and their lack of a billing/manager interface)

As for performance, at the moment I'm doing 28MB/s with 0 HDD WA, however that is because it is a 2GB torrent so fits into RAM. I'm downloading a 44GB torrent so we'll see how that performs as well.

Insofar as the previous speed complaints, the pure bandwidth (tested by wget -O /dev/null) seems to have increased to at least the same level as internal OVH (ie 70MB/s or so given HW bottleneck), and torrent performance is greatly improved as well but I'd put that primarily down to 2 disks and no vSphere.

I will shortly (when I can be bothered) setup SCC autoDL script, then we will see how it performs for real (and I have VERY precise benchmark stats from that, from 100Mbit all the way up to 10Gbit servers).

For international stuff obviously LW bandwidth is much better, so indeed hotfile etc people will love these. And pure bandwidth places will love it as well (being able to do say 200TB, though compared to a 100tb.com server I'd suspect it wouldn't be quite as good).

Also, I can't seem to find anyone who has one of your boxes, so not sure where you got your 300+ sales from, clearly none from any of the common (both high and low level) torrent trackers. I'd be interested to know who is using it, whether it is just a bunch of ultra-secret torrentors, or hotfile providers, or what :S

Trunk wise, what is the current issue that apparently will provide more BW once it is resolved? (might be from 3 weeks ago).

There is no issue with the speed or performance, tbh £120 for that kind of server with unlimited bandwidth is a great deal.

People who use this server are from all over and do all sorts with them from gaming servers to website hosting or data streaming. We also never said these servers were directed at torrent users, sure you can use it for that but thats not purely what we want to be aiming for.

Anyway yes alot of happy customers indeed.

Well for 120GBP (141 euro) yea its good, the same server straight from LW with 50Mbit 95th costs 200 euro for 3 mo, though it costs the same with 24 mo (140) but who wants to be locked in for that long :D The only benefit there though is for only 17 euro more, you can get 16GB RAM and 2x2TB, but by the same token you could just get a plain OVH with 10TB for 100 euro, so I guess there is a market in between :D

As for being aimed at torrent users vs other stuff, that is quite strange, since I don't know of a single website that needs a Quad core with 8GB RAM and 2TB storage with Gbit bandwidth, but maybe there are :S I guess that is how you are aiming for unmetered, since you aren't that worried about people doing much bandwidth overall, even a hard core streaming site would be hard pressed to do more than 50TB on that hardware.