Comments on: High-Speed BitTorrent - A Look Inside the 1Gbps Seedbox

By: bumblebelly

bumblebelly — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 10:28:36 +0000

This may be a little late to review torrentswift, but I feel I need to let other users know of my experience.

I got myself a high speed seedbox with torrentswift after reading reviews on this site and had a few days of great speeds and good service. Then I started having problems with stuck torrents, reboot problems and the server just powering down. Obviously I sent a support tickets to get help. I continually got no response, but it appeared that the guys were working behind the scenes as the server was turned back on for me after each ticket. Until I ran into the ’stuck torrent’ problem. Then the response stopped. I waited 6 days and got no response, until I opened a support ticket with sales instead of tech support, informing them that I wasnt happy. I did then get a reply for tech support with advise how to fix the problem….use the repair function.
This didnt work and I was stuck with a seedbox that I was unable to use as the torrents kept getting stuck. They were unable to fix the problem but as compensation, they credited me with an extra months service….very good, a broken server [probably software related] free for a month.

Useless service, slow ticket response times but very polite staff. Dont waste your money with them, and please filesharefreaks, stop recommending them until they sort themselves out. I’m sure you are maikng nice profits from the affil link, but where does it leave your credability..?

By: mysoogal

mysoogal — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:32:49 +0000

seedbox owners need to upload more ! look at those figures for upload how is that great for the community ? you download GB but upload Mbs ?

i hope private trackers and public trackers block traffic from any seedbox i dont see them doing any good ! just take and take and takeee

return nothing back

By: coaster

coaster — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 05:44:22 +0000

A 1 Gbps unmetered torrentflux seedbox for $40 means prices are coming down now.

Source: seedbox.me

By: rapidseeder

rapidseeder — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 03:55:52 +0000

check for new cheap and best seedbox services
.
.
.
.

rapidseeder.forumotion.net

By: umbongo

umbongo — Tue, 12 May 2009 23:40:57 +0000

@ rem

22,000 kB/s = 21.484375 megabytes per second.

80 Mb/s = 10,240 kB per second or just under 10 megabytes per second.

Or are you getting your units mixed up?

MB (megabytes) is used when reffering to RAM and storage space. Mb (megabits) is used when talking about tranfer speeds. So I think you have got a littel confused as this is faster than you’re connection of 80Mb/s.

By: Visitor

Visitor — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 00:59:58 +0000

Something is really wrong in this article. Yes, a Gbit-connection can net around 100MB/s and thus a normal DVDrip is 7 seconds of downloading and a DVD around 45 seconds. Let’s say, for the record, you need drives that can write (or read) 100MB/s.

What’s the deal about telling people it might not be feasible? Ordinary desktop-drives (single disk) are currently doing 75MB/s on sequential read. And when I look at the Tiger-servers you mention; no sane company would hook you up with Xeon-machines and NOT incorporate a solid disk-array. Hell, my current 3disk RAID5 at home can read at well over 150MB/s and write nearly 120Mb/s and that’s a “cheap” US$1200.- machine.

So, despite the fact I like most of the articles here, something seems incorrect on this article; even basic Dell-servers (1950 models) will average 80MB/s on single disks let alone beefed up 1TB / Quad-core servers like the Tiger 600

By: rem

rem — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 15:36:38 +0000

22 000 kb/s with 1 gigabit? L O L!

i get 80 MB/s with gigabit when i transfer files with ftp sites

By: Vision

Vision — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 23:55:27 +0000

thanks sharky,
it’s to some point true what you said about server load means nothing, i had a seedbox that entered a coma with 15 of server load (and a very expensive seedbox), while in another company my seedbox worked fine even with server load of 30 !!
i’ve read your article about {http://seedboxhosting.com} and you said that the server toke 50 torrents easily, so yes i guess that a machine like this with a proper use can work as a black hole sucking all the data from the net(except it will seed it back)

i can see that TorrentSwift has changed it’s plans, now you get 750G X 2(Raid 1) and unlimited traffic for the 300$, still expensive but i guess it worth’s it, specially if you could convince them to put utorrent instead of torrentflux and the Raid configuration to 0 .

thanks again sharky, i hope you keep this excellence work flowing

By: sharky

sharky — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 20:04:23 +0000

@VISION -For the screenshot in the article (and…BTW, I actually had it to 36) I was
really pushing hard to develop some good DL speeds, and I already know that
you really won’t get great speeds from downloading just one torrent at a
time. So, knowing that this dedicated server is brand-new with 8 GB RAM, I
knew I could *almost* add an unlimited amount of torrents simultaneously,
without killing it. This is basically what I did - I browsed through some
private torrents (torrentleech was a good start) looking for good S/L
numbers. I knew these would be fast (hopefully in both directions). TFlux
was a little bit choppy at 25-35 serverload, but it still refreshed every 60
seconds (Ajax was OFF). Never once did it crash or become unresponsive - but
it all has to do with the machine that TFlux is installed on. I’ve seen a
serverload of 5-10 kill many-a-machines, due to lack of RAM, mostly.

To answer your question, the number of ACTIVE ‘leeching’ torrents was around
25-30 - keep in mind that these 25 were ALL downloading at the same time,
and not only seeding. If I recall correctly (for that screenshot) there
were just 2 idle torrents, and maybe an additional 5 seeding torrents -
bringing the total to under 40 torrents. And that was a conservative
screenshot, for I’d had at least 50 or 60 in there before, maybe more. Not
only was that my first experience with a 1gbps pipe, but also with a seedbox
that had such excellent specs - so I wanted to verify that a serverload of
20 or higher will function just fine. I now believe the serverload means
nothing, as long as the machine can support it. I’m quite certain I could
have easily pushed that baby to a serverload over 50, but this wasn’t in my
best interest for viable screenshots, etc.

By: Vision

Vision — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:45:29 +0000

sharky , please answer my question…

how many torrents have you used (both idle\active) to get 26 of server load

By: Vision

Vision — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 15:35:47 +0000

how many torrents Active/Idle did it toke to get the server load to 26 ???

i knew it’s TorrentFlux GUI but with quad core and 8G ram i guess a lot

i hope to hear a reply soon
thanks for being a pioneer filesharefreak !!!!

By: bo

bo — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 23:23:14 +0000

You’ll never get an actual gigabit speed.
Just like a 100mbps generally caps around 50mbps… ditto for gigabits
unless you have a lot of RAM with a RAID0 hard drive setup and a high performance torrent client (ie not torrentflux)

By: lol

lol — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 14:30:42 +0000

hmm last I checked 23mB/s wasn’t a gigabit

not even close actually

By: bryan

bryan — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 00:20:00 +0000

a benz does wonders, but people still buy lambos. why? faster

By: Username

Username — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 20:39:02 +0000

But why pay that much for a box? A simple 100 mbit would do wonders, and cost a LOT less than a 1 gbps box.

By: Rad

Rad — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 17:52:00 +0000

Hmm… u could easily rape a new tracker’s self owned seedbox if they got free leech on.

By: bryan

bryan — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 05:03:38 +0000

Yah, 1gbs seedboxes rox sox, but you already know that sharky lol

By: Hugs

Hugs — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 04:24:26 +0000

Why only talking about torrentswift ? Some other 1Gb OVH resellers are cheaper (99€ at seedbox.fr, seedhost.eu, dediseed.wordpress.com) and OVH himself for those can buy it directly.

But when we think about it, is P2P really adapted to high speed servers downloading for home users ? I am wondering that when I see on Rslog comments last releases with RS. And sometimes only 30min after publishing on “scene” trackers, on wich you have to spend time and/or money to keep a good ratio. And RS or Usenet are only ~8€ / month…

By: Bill

Bill — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 04:22:50 +0000

kimsufi 1gbps is cheaper