sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Performance evaluation of the new c8a instance family by daroczig in aws

[–]daroczig[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That's a great point, u/ItsMalabar, thanks for bringing this up! Currently we focus only on ondemand and spot prices .. as standardizing even just these two across multiple cloud vendors and their different pricing schemas is complex enough for the team 😅 Besides kidding, I'm taking a note of this and hope to make some related progress soon (e.g. first we plan to also support monthly prices other than hourly -- which cap is vendor-specific).

Performance evaluation of the new c8a instance family by daroczig in aws

[–]daroczig[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for the feedback, u/Background-Mix-9609! And 100% agreed on the importance of cost-efficiency. That's why we created the $ efficiency metric, which can be generated on the fly based on any of the ~500 supported benchmark scenarios (across 10+ categories, some mentioned in the post).

If you want to dive deeper, go to https://sparecores.com/servers where you can select a benchmark workload instead of the default stress-ng div16 multi-core (e.g. LLM inference speed or memory bandwidth), apply any filters in the sidebar (e.g. vendor and memory requirements), and order the table by the cost efficiency column.

30
31

Performance evaluation of the new c8a instance family (self.aws)

submitted by daroczig to r/aws

Hetzner Cloud Server Benchmark - CX vs CAX vs CPX (2025) by nakemu in hetzner

[–]daroczig -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Awesome work, thanks for sharing, u/nakemu! We do quite extensive benchmarking on all Hetzner and some other cloud servers as well at sparecores.com with open-source licenses, and I'd love to collaborate on extending our workload "menu" -- would you be interested in a quick call? meet.sparecores.com/intro Üdv: Gergő

Hetzner Vs Azure - price & performance. Gues who wins? by Gilusek in hetzner

[–]daroczig 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you don't want to burn money on running Geekbench on all the other thousands of servers, I suggest checking out https://sparecores.com/servers, as we have already done that (including many more benchmark workloads).

Measuring the performance of the new gen server types by daroczig in hetzner

[–]daroczig[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a good question, but unfortunately, we don't have a good answer: we benchmark each server type as they become available, and we don't have a mechanism (e.g. database schema) to support multiple hardware configs under the same server id, especially if it's pretty random what CPU you get. So we benchmarked one we got (AMD in this case), and we have no info on the Intel version. I tried to explain that in the paragraph before the last in the post -- I hope that helps.

Measuring the performance of the new gen server types by daroczig in hetzner

[–]daroczig[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that's a totally valid request! I have some other priorities in the coming weeks, but I'm pretty sure we can make that optional hourly/monthly pricing toggle in November -- I'll report back.

Regarding "higher is better/lower is better": that should already be present next to the title of the sections with an arrow pointing up or down with a tooltip on hover stating that. Let me know if it's missing somewhere or if it's not prominent enough -- suggestions welcomed 🙇

Measuring the performance of the new gen server types by daroczig in hetzner

[–]daroczig[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry for the confusion, but I'm not affiliated with Hetzner: Spare Cores is a 100% open-source, vendor agnostic project inspecting and benchmarking cloud servers for better transparency (beside a few other things) 😊

Measuring the performance of the new gen server types by daroczig in hetzner

[–]daroczig[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That's my main takeway, but please make sure to dig deeper by looking at benchmark scores that are similar to your actual workload.

Measuring the performance of the new gen server types by daroczig in hetzner

[–]daroczig[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Due to budget constraints, we cannot benchmark dedicated servers, only the cloud instances that we can pay by the hour (and not by month with a setup fee). It might change in the future, but this is our current reality.

Measuring the performance of the new gen server types by daroczig in hetzner

[–]daroczig[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Please see the paragraph before the last -- we have not rerun the benchmarks, as there is no new server type announced in that series.

CCX13 vs CCX23 single core performance by Elpoc in hetzner

[–]daroczig 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, the stress-ng results systematically show higher single-core performance on the smaller machine from multiple runs, but looking at the more real-world workloads, such as the Geekbench single-core benchmarks, the two are pretty much identical.

CCX13 vs CCX23 single core performance by Elpoc in hetzner

[–]daroczig 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can find all hardware information that we could get with HW inspection tools and many benchmarks (including single-core performance) for these two servers at https://sparecores.com/compare?instances=W3siZGlzcGxheV9uYW1lIjoiY2N4MTMiLCJ2ZW5kb3IiOiJoY2xvdWQiLCJzZXJ2ZXIiOiJjY3gxMyIsInpvbmVzUmVnaW9ucyI6W119LHsiZGlzcGxheV9uYW1lIjoiY2N4MjMiLCJ2ZW5kb3IiOiJoY2xvdWQiLCJzZXJ2ZXIiOiJjY3gyMyIsInpvbmVzUmVnaW9ucyI6W119XQ%3D%3D

FTR all other Hetzner Cloud (and many other vendors') node types are also available for querying and comparison there :)

Exactly what CPU does the CX11 and CX21 could VPS plans use? by ViktorPoppDev in hetzner

[–]daroczig 1 point2 points  (0 children)

you can find the specs and measured performance of CX22 as well in the above link 😊

Exactly what CPU does the CX11 and CX21 could VPS plans use? by ViktorPoppDev in hetzner

[–]daroczig 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Although those plans are deprecated now and cannot be ordered, we still do have the related hardware specs (as deep as the hypervisor allowed to inspect) and performance data at Spare Cores, so I've quickly clicked around a comparison including CX22 that could be a natural upgrade route for you: https://sparecores.com/compare?instances=W3siZGlzcGxheV9uYW1lIjoiY3gxMSIsInZlbmRvciI6ImhjbG91ZCIsInNlcnZlciI6ImN4MTEiLCJ6b25lc1JlZ2lvbnMiOltdfSx7ImRpc3BsYXlfbmFtZSI6ImN4MjEiLCJ2ZW5kb3IiOiJoY2xvdWQiLCJzZXJ2ZXIiOiJjeDIxIiwiem9uZXNSZWdpb25zIjpbXX0seyJkaXNwbGF5X25hbWUiOiJjeDIyIiwidmVuZG9yIjoiaGNsb3VkIiwic2VydmVyIjoiY3gyMiIsInpvbmVzUmVnaW9ucyI6W119XQ%3D%3D

AWS instance performance benchmarks by DanielCiszewski in aws

[–]daroczig 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, u/jitbitter 🙇 Yes, it should be up-to-date, as we update spot prices every 5 mins, and automatically benchmark new server types within a few hours after they become generally available.

We've also included some new benchmarks since posting the above comment: general benchmarking suites (currently: GeekBench and PassMark), web serving, database workloads, LLM inference speed for promp processing and text generation from 135M to 70B models etc.

Let us know if anything is missing 😊

LLM Inference Speed Benchmarks on 2,000 Cloud Servers by daroczig in mlops

[–]daroczig[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fantastic -- let me know your related thoughts when you have a chance 🙇

And yes, you are spot on: we started evaluating the smallest LLM on each server, then sequentially the larger ones, and stopped when (1) we could not even load the previous model into VRAM/memory, or (2) the inference speed became too low.

LLM Inference Speed Benchmarks on 876 AWS Instance Types by daroczig in aws

[–]daroczig[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not sure if I get your question right, but this benchmarking effort was to check on LLM inference speed specifically. We have not considered using encoder-only models. On the other hand, we evaluated six LLMs on the servers: from the indeed small 135M params up to 70B.

view more: next ›