Hm. well, first, if you want to compare different cpu architectures, that's really hard, because the effectiveness varies massively by what sort of tasks are p

Hm. well, first, if you want to compare different cpu architectures, that's really hard, because the effectiveness varies massively by what sort of tasks are performed... so this is a task that requires so much fudge factor I'd call it more marketing than engineering, and ignore it. Hm. But what If I mentioned the minimum and maximum? I can do that... so, for example, on a 256MiB VPS, you are probably on a server with 8 cores and 32GiB ram. (now, personally, I steal 1 core and 1GiB ram for the dom0, but you could squeeze that some, though I wouldn't recommend giving the dom0 less than one core.) so, uh, you have a total of 124 domains, right? and 7 cores, so each domain gets, what, 5% or so of a core at minimum, and then 100% of the number of vcpus given at maximum. now, if the provider was simply up front about how much ram they put on a box, the user can figure this all out for themselves (in a xen system /proc/cpuinfo will give you information about the real cpu) But yes, this could be made much more clear. But even so, it'd probably not result in anything that is usefully comparable to a dedicated server, and really, the performance bottleneck we usually see is disk; if you use 2 or 4 spindles for those 124 accounts, well, disk sucks pretty badly for everyone. But this is the nature of small VPSs. (so really, giving you specs about my disks might be better; or just making public graphs of CPU and Disk usage on servers. But I have a hell of a time convincing people that anything but the CPU matters, so that might be a waste of time.)