建站VPS推荐:iozoom,接入中国电信/中国联通骨干/20gDDOS保护

2016年7月21日08:42:07建站VPS推荐:iozoom,接入中国电信/中国联通骨干/20gDDOS保护已关闭评论 5,847

打算重新给大家介绍一下iozoom,为什么呢?因为机房、网络、带宽。iozoom刚成立的时候用的是psychz的机房,估计是不满意鸡迷路?反正后来转换了用的sharktech的,接入电信北美骨干+联通北美骨干网络,1000M端口,由sharktech提供20G不缩水的DDOS保护,你知道那个鸡迷路的20G DDOS保护多数时候就是一个玩具...

建站VPS推荐:iozoom,接入中国电信/中国联通骨干/20gDDOS保护

 

主机测评以前写过iozoom的vps的测评,现在暂时手头没有他们家的VPS,也就不能来个二次测评了,大家凑合着看第一次写的吧:iozoom-洛杉矶KVM最低款VPS简单测评,性能强悍!

 

洛杉矶

测试IP:107.167.5.195 ,接入了中国电信和中国联通,网络了得!

芝加哥

测试IP: 204.188.245.67

 

官方网站: www.iozoom.com

 

KVM 2GB【最低款VPS】

内存:2G

硬盘:20G SSD

CPU:1核

流量:2000G/月

价格:7美元

优惠码:LET

购买链接

 

广州电信的不明真相的吃瓜群众表示很惊讶:

 

C:\Users\gy>ping 107.167.5.195 -t

正在 Ping 107.167.5.195 具有 32 字节的数据:
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=157ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=155ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=154ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=157ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=155ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=154ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=155ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=155ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=155ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=157ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=155ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=155ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=156ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=157ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=157ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=157ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=155ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=155ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=157ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=155ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=156ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=157ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=157ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=155ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=157ms TTL=52
来自 107.167.5.195 的回复: 字节=32 时间=157ms TTL=52

107.167.5.195 的 Ping 统计信息:
数据包: 已发送 = 26,已接收 = 26,丢失 = 0 (0% 丢失),
往返行程的估计时间(以毫秒为单位):
最短 = 154ms,最长 = 157ms,平均 = 155ms
Control-C
^C

广州电信tracert 吃瓜群众表示是鲨鱼机房?

Host % Sent Recv Best Avrg Wrst Last
192.168.63.1 0 25 25 2 2 8 2
No response from host 100 4 0 0 0 0 0
14.23.61.73 0 25 25 3 142 1183 3
121.33.196.125 0 25 25 2 11 140 3
183.56.31.37 0 25 25 2 4 6 5
58.61.216.121 0 25 25 3 4 7 4
202.97.33.150 45 9 5 0 4 7 7
202.97.34.66 24 13 10 0 6 10 4
202.97.52.218 0 25 25 165 168 171 171
202.97.52.238 0 25 25 161 168 193 164
te0-2-2.chinatelecom.edge01.onewilshire.la.ca.sharktech.net 0 25 25 160 164 185 161
10.0.0.6 0 25 25 154 159 201 162
lax.iozoom.com 0 25 25 153 154 156 154

 

本人测试了一下天津联通的tracert走法

从天津联通--北京联通--美国加利福尼亚州圣何塞 联通--美国加利福尼亚州圣何塞--美国加利福尼亚州洛杉矶--美国加利福尼亚州洛杉矶 sharktech.net

也就是说天津经过北京然后直达了美国加州,在加州境内的圣何塞转入洛杉矶,联通这样的走法也是相当的漂亮了!

 

经过多个节点的联通线路测试,除了深圳联通是直接去了香港联通,然后直接到美国加州的,其余的全部都是经过北京联通节点直接到美国加州的,整体来说效果都是很理想的!

 

下面数据不是本人测试的结果,从国外转载而来:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark Run: Sat Jul 02 2016 22:45:06 - 23:13:15
1 CPU in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests

Dhrystone 2 using register variables       28439217.5 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Double-Precision Whetstone                     3506.7 MWIPS (9.8 s, 7 samples)
Execl Throughput                               5800.7 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks       1088163.2 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks          313189.7 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks       2142705.0 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Pipe Throughput                             1954010.4 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Pipe-based Context Switching                 391524.6 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Process Creation                              15155.3 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                   9024.5 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                   1183.0 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
System Call Overhead                        3934875.8 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)

System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0   28439217.5   2437.0
Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0       3506.7    637.6
Execl Throughput                                 43.0       5800.7   1349.0
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0    1088163.2   2747.9
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0     313189.7   1892.4
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0    2142705.0   3694.3
Pipe Throughput                               12440.0    1954010.4   1570.7
Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0     391524.6    978.8
Process Creation                                126.0      15155.3   1202.8
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4       9024.5   2128.4
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0       1183.0   1971.7
System Call Overhead                          15000.0    3934875.8   2623.3
                                                                   ========
System Benchmarks Index Score                                        1749.1

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark Run: Sat Jul 02 2016 23:13:15 - 23:41:22
1 CPU in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests

Dhrystone 2 using register variables       28343653.9 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Double-Precision Whetstone                     3506.0 MWIPS (9.8 s, 7 samples)
Execl Throughput                               5789.1 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks       1085087.1 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks          312795.5 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks       2162312.9 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Pipe Throughput                             1947864.2 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Pipe-based Context Switching                 392665.5 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Process Creation                              15724.9 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                   9047.9 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                   1185.0 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
System Call Overhead                        3932525.8 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)

System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0   28343653.9   2428.8
Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0       3506.0    637.5
Execl Throughput                                 43.0       5789.1   1346.3
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0    1085087.1   2740.1
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0     312795.5   1890.0
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0    2162312.9   3728.1
Pipe Throughput                               12440.0    1947864.2   1565.8
Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0     392665.5    981.7
Process Creation                                126.0      15724.9   1248.0
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4       9047.9   2133.9
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0       1185.0   1975.0
System Call Overhead                          15000.0    3932525.8   2621.7
                                                                   ========
System Benchmarks Index Score                                        1754.9

I/O Pings

ioping -c 10
request=1 time=0.2 ms
request=2 time=0.3 ms
request=3 time=0.2 ms
request=4 time=0.3 ms
request=5 time=0.3 ms
request=6 time=0.2 ms
request=7 time=0.2 ms
request=8 time=0.3 ms
request=9 time=0.2 ms
request=10 time=0.2 ms

10 requests completed in 9004.1 ms, 3981 iops, 15.6 mb/s

I/O Seek Test (No Cache)

ioping -RD
8077 iops, 31.6 mb/s
min/avg/max/mdev = 0.1/0.1/0.6/0.0 ms

I/O Reads - Sequential

ioping -RL
3255 iops, 813.8 mb/s
min/avg/max/mdev = 0.3/0.3/13.0/0.2 ms

I/O Reads - Cached

ioping -RC
501619 iops, 1959.4 mb/s
min/avg/max/mdev = 0.0/0.0/0.0/0.0 ms

DD

dd if=/dev/zero of=sb-io-test bs=1M count=1k conv=fdatasync
1.049 s, 1.0 GB/s
dd if=/dev/zero of=sb-io-test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
0.884909 s, 1.2 GB/s
dd if=/dev/zero of=sb-io-test bs=1M count=1k oflag=dsync
2.35989 s, 455 MB/s
dd if=/dev/zero of=sb-io-test bs=64k count=16k oflag=dsync
13.3407 s, 80.5 MB/s

FIO

Read IOPS 77097.0
Read Bandwidth 308.3 MB/second
Write IOPS 46391.0
Write Bandwidth 185.5 MB/second
Raw FIO Output
FIO random reads:
randomreads: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=64
fio-2.0.9
Starting 1 process
randomreads: Laying out IO file(s) (1 file(s) / 1024MB)

randomreads: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=16539: Sat Jul  2 22:42:20 2016
  read : io=1024.3MB, bw=308388KB/s, iops=77097 , runt=  3401msec
  cpu          : usr=11.53%, sys=52.71%, ctx=4831, majf=0, minf=69
  IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=100.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
     issued    : total=r=262207/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
   READ: io=1024.3MB, aggrb=308388KB/s, minb=308388KB/s, maxb=308388KB/s, mint=3401msec, 
maxt=3401msec

Disk stats (read/write):
  vda: ios=250246/0, merge=0/0, ticks=135136/0, in_queue=135096, util=94.47%
Done

FIO random writes:
randomwrites: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=64
fio-2.0.9
Starting 1 process

randomwrites: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=16543: Sat Jul  2 22:42:26 2016
  write: io=1024.3MB, bw=185568KB/s, iops=46391 , runt=  5652msec
  cpu          : usr=5.66%, sys=21.24%, ctx=14379, majf=0, minf=5
  IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=100.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
     issued    : total=r=0/w=262207/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
  WRITE: io=1024.3MB, aggrb=185567KB/s, minb=185567KB/s, maxb=185567KB/s, mint=5652msec,
 maxt=5652msec

Disk stats (read/write):
  vda: ios=0/250606, merge=0/0, ticks=0/312824, in_queue=312772, util=96.80%
Done

网络下载测试:

Location Rate
Cachefly 86.1 MB/s
Linode, Atlanta, GA, USA 14.4 MB/s
Linode, Dallas, TX, USA 26.9 MB/s
Linode, Tokyo, JP 16.7 MB/s
Linode, London, UK 6.81 MB/s
OVH, Paris, France 7.86 MB/s
SmartDC, Rotterdam, Netherlands 6.21 MB/s
Hetzner, Nuernberg, Germany 4.71 MB/s
iiNet, Perth, WA, Australia 6.97 MB/s
Leaseweb, Haarlem, NL 9.10 MB/s
Leaseweb, Manassas, VA, USA 15.5 MB/s
Softlayer, Singapore 5.86 MB/s
Softlayer, Seattle, WA, USA 36.8 MB/s
Softlayer, San Jose, CA, USA 65.4 MB/s
Softlayer, Washington, DC, USA 22.9 MB/s

本站不对信息的真伪做任何的保障,请自行甄别,自负责任。
联系站长:mail (at) zhujiceping.com