Here's what our second SuperCharger customer said about his system, back in 2007: "SuperCharger did what you said it would do. The first time I ran it, the time to do my end of day job dropped from 10 hours 55 minutes to 27 minutes." This understates today's performance differences, because the customer was coming from a mirrored pair of 10,000 rpm SAS drives, and was going to a pair of 133x CF cards (because affordable SSDs did not yet exist). Even our slowest SSD drives today are five times faster than 133x CF cards.

The simple way to determine whether you will benefit from High IOPS hosting is to look at your CPU performance. As a general rule, the benefit of IOPS improvement is inversely proportional to CPU utilization. If your CPU is running at close to 100%, SuperCharger will not help because you are CPU bound. But if you are running with 50% CPU utilization, SuperCharger should double performance, and if your CPU is running idle 97% of the time, SuperCharger will increase performance 30-fold.

You should only do this if you want maximum general performance. Most people use RAM today as way of improving very slow disk performance. Getting data off hard disk and into RAM can increase "random read" speeds 1,000 fold. But the problem with RAM is that it speeds up reads but does not speed up writes. Conversely, if you need lots of system memory but don't want to pay the price, SuperCharged Flash media can be used as swap space with very quick response times.

Without raid, if your mass storage media fails, you will lose all your data that is not backed up to an external device. Most hosters charge at least $50 a month extra for raided-systems, and these can easily jump over $100 for larger raid sets. Conversely, our raid protected systems cost as little as just $16 a month more than unprotected systems.

Windows server edition has a raid scheduler that does not perform well with high speed devices. The scheduler is written using "ticks" which are 1/1000th of a second. Since flash drives read and write typically in 100 microseconds, the scheduler cannot respond to the needs of multiple disks, and never delivers random read speed in excess of a single flash drive. There are several simple ways to deal with this problem:

1.	If you are only running a single flash drive or a mirrored pair, this performance loss is not an issue. You can run windows directly.
2.	You can install windows on top of a Xen, KVM, or VMware virtualization layer. This reduces single thread read IOPS by about 1,500 (about 20% of the transfer rate) but otherwise only reduces IO rates by about 6%.

The terabyte included in our standard systems is actually is a lot of transfer. You can think of it as 20 million web pages, or two and a half million books, or even as 700,000 minutes of youtube video play. Because it represents such a large amount of resource, less than five percent of all dedicated systems hit that level.

On the other hand, it's just about impossible for a small system with Hard Disks to consume one terabyte of transfer, let alone 10 terabytes of transfer. The transfer rate of the hard disks prevents this except in cases where one is streaming large linear files. Accordingly, high transfer rates are only possible with expensive systems that have lots of RAM and lots of disks. But Flash media can process IO several hundred times faster than hard disks, resulting in situation where even inexpensive machines can consume a great deal of Internet transfer.

There are two categories of prospects we refuse to deal with. The first category is those engaged in illegal, immoral, or socially unacceptable activity, including spammers, pornographers, phishers, and content theives. The second category is those with a history or probability of defaulting on agreements. If you fall into these categories, please be aware that you may be wasting your time as we check out references carefully.