Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I'm looking for a well-respected, high-performing Windows Server 2008 Hyper-V VPS host.

For my linux hosting, I use a shared WebFaction account, so I'm spoiled by their incredible service and support. RackSpaceCloud also sounds really good, especially for linux hosting, but it sounds like their Windows hosting is just getting off the ground. I've heard good things about SoftSysHosting, but I didn't know if there were any other VPS providers out there that people will give strong endorsements for (as I do for WebFaction every chance I get).

share|improve this question
I'm a huge fan of Rackspace Cloud for Windows, but you probably won't be able to use Hyper-V on their instances because it's already virtual. Why do you need a Hyper-V host? – Nic Mar 22 '10 at 3:56 offers windows VPS, but i doubt is Hyper-v

You best option might be Azurre. They will soon have the virtual worker, which should make the instance equivelant to any other windows VPS.

Lastly look at they list a lot of ISPs and have offers on VPS accounts.

share|improve this answer

We've run Hyper-V forever but I'd question why do you want a Hyper-V host specifically? If you're looking for high performance a true dedicated box still can't be matched - Disk I/O generally is the limiting factor in Hyper-V servers that we host, after a certain amount of disk i/o you want to start looking at dedicated - the number varies some, but < 10 megabytes/second almost always.

share|improve this answer

I've had good experiences with ITSVPS, very fast disk speed - HD Tune was showing >100MB/s which seemed quite a lot. I've recently moved away from them because of latency of having a server in the US (I'm in Europe), otherwise they were good. Their control panel is a bit weird, but at least you can reboot the server if needed.

share|improve this answer
100mb? I could copy a file with 400mb on my OS disc set - that is FROM and TO, 800 sustainted IO. With just 4 discs. Now I have more ;) 100mb/s is not stellar these days. And totally irrelevant - the main factor is the IOPS budget. – TomTom Oct 29 '10 at 11:18

Does it have to be Hyper-V? If not, the Amazon EC2 Win 2008 hosting works great for us. It makes managing server images a snap.

share|improve this answer
Amazon EC2 seems really expensive to me, compared to some of the reliable VPS options out there. – Donald Hughes Aug 25 '10 at 2:37
It is. Clouds normally are really freaking expensive, BUT you only pay per hour etc. Nice to start up 20 instances for an hour. BAD BAD BAD for the base load. – TomTom Oct 29 '10 at 11:19
up vote 0 down vote accepted

We ended up using Softsys Hosting, and have not been disappointed. Very nice performance and bandwidth.

share|improve this answer
Sorry, I know this is old thread, but what plan did you use? I have one 2GB plan, the website is fine and so SQL Server making good use of the machine, well good use that RDP to the machine is a bit slow. – Meligy at GuruStop.NET Jul 29 '11 at 6:49
I'm looking into Softsys VPS right now but I'm new to admin vps myself since I've mostly been dealing with Shared Hosts, I would like to ask if this is something I could handle, is there a big learning curve. Thank you. – fanray Jan 16 '12 at 22:28 offers a trivially scalable VPS with Linux, Windows and FreeBSD support. You should give them a try, get two $1 one-day nodes and create a Windows VPS. They offer SSD nodes that replace your storage with fusionIO, which will probably be enough for all your I/O needs.

share|improve this answer
Disclaimer - that's a referral link. – Mircea Chirea Sep 27 '10 at 3:12

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.