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. 39 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  0.101 0.008 0.164 0.164 - 0
2 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.076 0.011 0.024 0.032 1077 9
3 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.125 0.012 0.444 0.483 1065 41
4 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.199 0.023 0.048 0.048 - 0
5 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.173 0.028 0.058 0.147 649 57
6 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.105 0.043 0.087 0.087 - 0
7 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.119 0.053 0.213 0.213 - 0
8 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.109 0.061 0.124 0.124 - 0
9 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.107 0.062 0.133 0.303 350 60
10 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.209 0.062 0.126 0.128 2255 3
11 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.069 0.063 0.515 1.307 81 64
12 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.184 0.064 0.128 0.128 - 0
13 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.100 0.064 0.144 0.258 328 37
14 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.069 0.064 0.129 0.129 - 0
15 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.306 0.064 0.129 0.129 - 0
16 Windows Server 2008  0:00:00  0.000  0.097 0.065 0.187 0.391 150 30
17 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.108 0.066 0.128 0.161 505 17
18 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.330 0.066 0.132 0.132 - 0
19 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.056 0.068 0.136 0.136 - 0
20 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.126 0.070 0.139 0.139 - 0
21 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.114 0.070 0.184 0.184 - 0
22 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.000  0.102 0.073 0.149 0.450 220 66
23 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.245 0.079 0.385 0.716 160 53
24 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.059 0.082 0.167 0.167 - 0
25 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.156 0.083 0.168 0.168 - 0
26 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.098 0.083 0.230 0.230 - -
27 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.643 0.088 0.173 0.173 - 0
28 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.123 0.095 0.189 0.189 - -
29 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.151 0.101 0.204 0.306 160 16
30 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.163 0.116 0.261 0.566 83 25
31 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.186 0.187 0.266 0.266 - -
32 Citrix Netscaler  0:00:00  0.649  0.135 0.091 0.191 0.380 208 39
33 Linux  0:00:00  0.911  0.159 0.062 0.125 0.125 - 0
34 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.913  0.198 0.068 0.139 0.139 - 0
35 Linux  0:00:00  1.042  0.268 0.008 0.199 0.384 242 45
36 Linux  0:00:00  1.297  0.064 0.009 0.158 0.159 3583 1
37 Linux  0:00:00  1.546  0.226 0.088 0.326 0.650 326 105
38 Linux  0:00:00  1.811  0.145 0.010 1.053 1.166 775 87
39 Linux  0:00:00  3.197  0.097 0.010 0.152 0.335 105 19
 

Report from 2-May-2015 08:45 till 3-May-2015 08:43

Generated on 3-May-2015 08:48

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, Phoenix/GoDaddy, Italy/Aruba, 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.