VPS or Shared Hosting?

[TuxInABox]

I've been wondering about the benefits of both VPS and shared web hosting for some time. At the moment I'm using shared web hosting, but I've also been wondering whether VPS is worth the plunge, especially since some VPS plans appear to be cheaper than their shared web hosting equivalents.

As far as I know, VPSes need more administration and upkeeping than shared web hosting plans, but you also have more control over how your website runs, so you can also use Python instead of PHP if you want to. I've used PHP for my web development so far. I've also heard VPSes are faster than shared web hosting plans in some situations, especially when it comes to the amount of time it takes to process a site request.

What do you think?

[alextab]

It really depends but the main advantage of a VPS is the flexibility and control just as you say.

It can also be true that the isolated environment of the VPS will provide more consistent performance than a shared host where other client's websites may effect the performance of your own since you are all competing for the same resources. However, VPS can be oversold just like shared hosting as far as CPU utilization, network and disk i/o. A well managed shared host will do better than an oversold VPS.

If you need cPanel consider 1GB min of dedicated RAM (not burst). At the moment VPS hosting based on Xen are often better because it isn't as convenient to oversell the resources on that system. At any rate, IMO it is best to pay a bit more and stick with higher quality providers.

[johnthomas1433]

If you notice a VPS plan that's cheaper than its shared hosting equivalent, then its simply not worth your time. The reason being that even though you might be promised unlimited features in a shared hosting plan, you are simply one of the user using the same server. The company expects you to not use hardly any of the features given to you.

That's not the case with a VPS. You are expected to be the only one using it. That's the reason why they should cost more. Its the VPS is cheaper than shared hosting, then its simply not VPS.

[howdareu]

I've been wondering about the benefits of both VPS and shared web hosting for some time. At the moment I'm using shared web hosting, but I've also been wondering whether VPS is worth the plunge, especially since some VPS plans appear to be cheaper than their shared web hosting equivalents.

As far as I know, VPSes need more administration and upkeeping than shared web hosting plans, but you also have more control over how your website runs, so you can also use Python instead of PHP if you want to. I've used PHP for my web development so far. I've also heard VPSes are faster than shared web hosting plans in some situations, especially when it comes to the amount of time it takes to process a site request.

What do you think?

VPS is definitely better when compared to shared hosting since we can install any software or OS without affecting other virtual machines on the same server. Thus we gain more privilege to the server. With this technology of partitioning a single server, we can enjoy the benefits which are similar to dedicated hosting and as an addition, you can too do the administrative tasks such as software installation, multiple site hosting, server rebooting and configuring server as your wish.If we need to host a website which receives quite a large visitors and we need to have more access to server then we can avail the VPS hosting.I am using VPS hosting from 9cubehosting.com since I found they provide reliable service at low cost.With their multiple data centers they give a good uptime for my website.

[Don Quixote]

I think there are two factors which should be considered when deciding to use a vps or shared hosting. One is your need. Do you need a vps? How would you know that you need a vps? Well, if you are on shared hosting and your site is running well, it's obvious that you don't need a vps. The second factor to consider is not whether you can afford a vps but rather whether the extra cost is justified. Let's say you are on shared hosting and your site is loading slower than you would like it to be. So you think about upgrading to a vps. The question you should be asking is whether the site is making the kind of money that justifies using a vps. Of course, if you are doing all this for fun and money is not a problem, there's no need to consider this question in the first place.

[ajay4seo]

Hi,

VPS hosting gives you more privileges as compare to shared hosting. With VPS hosting you get root access to the servers, which enables you to install applications of your choice.

[sumana]

VPS Hosting is Faster than shared hosting: significantly fewer people share a web server, since everyone must get their guaranteed resources. If someone else uses 100 percent of their CPU time in their VPS, that does not affect on you.

[Don Quixote]

VPS Hosting is Faster than shared hosting: significantly fewer people share a web server, since everyone must get their guaranteed resources. If someone else uses 100 percent of their CPU time in their VPS, that does not affect on you.

Oh yes, it would if you are on an OpenVZ vps that heavily oversold. This is because an OpenVZ vps shares the burst ram. When someone persistently uses the burst ram to the full, you will definitely be affected.

[bauss]

VPS plans are usually more expensive, if you can get it cheaper than shared hosting then go for it!

[Don Quixote]

VPS plans are usually more expensive, if you can get it cheaper than shared hosting then go for it!

Well, vps plans have gone down to as low as single-digit prices. Now you can get a vps with 1Gb ram for as little as 3.50usd per month. This, of course, is an unmanaged vps without any installed control panel. Learn to install Kloxo or Virtualmin and you are good.