Latest Performance News

Netcraft Hosting Provider Performance Monitoring

Netcraft measures and makes available the response times of leading hosting providers' sites. The performance measurements are made at fifteen minute intervals from separate points around the internet, and averages are calculated over the immediately preceding 24 hour period.

Hosting Providers sites ordered by failures over the last 1 day, updated every 15 mins. 44 sites
Click on a column heading to sort by that column, click twice to reverse order.
Click the site name to see graphs of site performance.
FAQ
Rank Performance graph Company site OS Outage hh:mm:ss Failed Req% DNS Connect First byte Total Kb/s size(K)
1 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.126 0.010 0.267 0.318 1259 64
2 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.084 0.015 0.031 0.046 571 9
3 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.125 0.016 0.035 0.093 894 52
4 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.069 0.021 0.044 0.044 - 0
5 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.148 0.022 1.308 1.439 649 85
6 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.170 0.050 0.102 0.103 2535 3
7 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.261 0.052 0.106 0.106 - 0
8 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.064 0.053 0.129 0.237 216 23
9 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.117 0.054 0.135 0.213 437 34
10 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.109 0.056 0.129 0.129 - 0
11 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.087 0.056 0.111 0.111 - 0
12 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.190 0.056 0.113 0.113 - -
13 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.178 0.059 0.114 0.192 322 25
14 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.083 0.059 0.416 0.416 - 0
15 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.134 0.062 0.146 0.149 - -
16 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.195 0.068 0.210 0.210 - 0
17 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.000  0.104 0.069 0.140 0.871 101 74
18 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.114 0.069 0.139 0.180 405 17
19 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.302 0.070 0.337 0.563 97 22
20 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.150 0.071 0.147 0.336 284 54
21 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.161 0.072 0.175 0.300 279 35
22 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.068 0.073 0.146 0.146 - 0
23 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.153 0.073 0.154 0.197 255 11
24 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.152 0.073 0.160 0.205 333 15
25 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.000  0.146 0.077 0.229 0.555 217 71
26 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.353 0.078 0.399 0.716 170 54
27 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.213 0.081 0.165 0.579 71 29
28 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.251 0.082 0.163 0.163 - 0
29 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.000  0.098 0.096 0.324 0.637 150 47
30 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.248 0.102 0.341 1.097 291 220
31 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.125 0.103 0.203 0.203 - -
32 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.258 0.123 0.250 0.496 152 38
33 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.202 0.124 0.571 0.909 194 66
34 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.183 0.126 0.254 0.382 126 16
35 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.205 0.129 0.278 0.562 84 24
36 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.197 0.140 0.212 0.213 - -
37 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.191 0.161 0.320 0.320 - 0
38 Linux  0:00:00  0.520  0.126 0.078 0.157 0.157 - 0
39 unknown  0:00:00  0.651  0.098 0.021 0.585 0.635 874 43
40 unknown  0:00:00  0.779  0.186 0.123 0.673 1.052 192 73
41 unknown  0:00:00  1.172  0.086 0.020 0.136 0.137 14833 1
42 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  2.062  0.063 0.128 0.258 0.635 144 54
43 Linux  0:00:00  4.937  0.229 0.088 0.563 1.678 54 60
44 Linux  7:00:35  89.462  0.081 0.063 0.141 9.978 3 30
 

Report from 31-Aug-2014 18:35 till 1-Sep-2014 18:30

Generated on 1-Sep-2014 18:36

Note: Outage times display the minimum outage time which may understate each outage by up to 15 minutes, which is the sampling frequency.

If you are researching prospective hosting locations, or performing competitor analysis and would like to buy bespoke performance monitoring of sites of your choice, or access to historical data, please mail us at sales@netcraft.com

Interpreting the Tables

Using the performance of a hosting provider's own site to determine the performance of the hosting companies network, is only indicative. By default the sites are ranked in order of failed requests and time to connect, shortest first, in order to give the clearest indication of network capacity and congestion, with the least impact from the performance of the companies' own web servers, though it is possible to sort by any column by clicking on the column heading.

Presently our performance collectors are located at London/DXI Networks, New York/New York Internet, Pennsylvania/INetU-2, San Jose/Datapipe, Italy/Aruba, Romania/Hostway, Zurich/Qube and Amsterdam/Webair. These companies have an advantage over the other companies listed in the table, as each of them have a collector in their own datacenter. Companies in the Far East are at a disadvantage as we do not currently have a performance collector in the region.

Companies using a caching system such as Akamai would have a particular advantage as the response to our request would come from the Akamai server closest to each performance collector.

If you are using the table as a guide when choosing where to locate a dedicated or collocated server, remember that connection times fluctuate continually, and only hundredths of a second separate the top companies. Avoiding companies showing prolonged outages is likely to be a better strategy than necessarily going for the company with the fastest connection time.

Other factors including availability and quality of support, and price will also be important. If you are considering shared hosting then the load on the shared hosting system will likely be a greater constraint on the performance of your site than network connection time.

More information can be found in the FAQ.