VM Server Vs Dedicated Server

Not open for further replies.
I have been looking to update our shared hosting package to a managed Dedicated Server, but some companies offer VM Server (not the same as a VPS). Looking at this comparison table Dedicated Server vs VM there seems that VM Server is a better option. I just wanted to know If any one has any experience with VMs and what are their cons over a Dedicated Server (I think the table I linked to might be a bit basis)


Staff member
As you pointed out, the comparison table is a bit biased :)

Some of the points are valid, but they're obviously trying to sell some kind of VM / VPS hosting

A lot will depend on what you are doing and what you need..
i have 3 pvs on 2 continet (europe and usa). and 1 on shared hosting in usa. from the beggining i bought shared, it was cheaper at that time. during 1 year i had a lot of issues with my provider about my database. they were saying that i was using to much of their server resourses and sometimes my websites where in down. after a lot of research i found vps servers which i would not say that they are expensive. nowdays you can find very nice deals on vps. and i bought one vps which i had no problems at all. the speed of my website was absolutelly amaizing. so, to save some money i would sugest for everybody vps. you just dont need to worry about the hardware of the server. but if you need a high end server you are going to need a lot of money, and if there is smth wrong with the server you will need to repair or buy.
Not open for further replies.
Award-winning Mac antivirus and Internet security software