Z.COM 新加坡云主机 KVM VPS主机 SSD硬盘 IO性能 速度体验简单测评

不得不说最近几天都在讨论GMO旗下的高端大气域名Z.COM家的注册赠送2000日元的活动,可以直接用于注册域名、购买虚拟主机以及云vps等业务,在上一天对他家的日本节点vps主机进行了简单的评测记录(Z.COM 日本云主机 KVM VPS主机 性能速度体验简单测评),电信速度上有点欠缺,目前老耿正在使用GMO旗下另外一家conoha的日本节点,使用了CDN服务。现在试用一下他家新加坡节点,看看是不是犹如部分伙伴说的速度比日本的好呢?

第一、新加坡基础配置方案

  • CPU:2核心CPU
  • 内存:1024MB
  • 硬盘:50GB SSD
  • 流量:2T
  • 架构:KVM
  • IP数:1独立IP
  • 价格:1170日元/月(购买)

第二、主机配置与网络下载文件速度

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 min,

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

同样的还是这颗CPU E5-2660 v3 @ 2.60GHz

第三、MTR路由追踪测试

gmo-z

第四、PING速度测试

ping测试

的确电信线路表现比联通以及移动线路要好不少,而且几乎是直连!

第五、硬盘IO性能测试

[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

第六、UnixBench跑分简单测试

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

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

1 x Execl Throughput 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

2 x Execl Throughput 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
Execl Throughput 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
Execl Throughput 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

总结:跑分上比日本节点的要好些,新加坡电信线路也比日本线路好些,看自己的用户来进行选择吧,选择新加坡线路要比日本线路贵200多日元!他家主要还是建站的多,对于科学上网的估计后期会不会像conoha一样屏蔽科学上网端口!现在是限制流量,据官方介绍称不会乱封账号,就是不知道大量的用户入住会怎么样。从现在的测试结果来看,资源还是比较富裕,各方面配置以及接口与conoha是一样的,就连价格以及面板设置都没有什么区别。

还没回应

发表评论

电子邮件地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注