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 unknown  0:00:00  0.131  0.068 0.066 0.133 0.133 - 0
2 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.261  0.145 0.080 0.168 0.168 - -
3 Linux  0:00:00  0.262  0.056 0.063 0.372 1.030 90 59
4 Linux  0:00:00  0.521  0.183 0.141 0.218 0.218 - -
5 unknown  0:00:00  0.522  0.120 0.062 0.125 0.126 1811 3
6 Linux  0:00:00  0.522  0.173 0.064 0.127 0.127 - 0
7 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.522  0.053 0.075 0.151 0.151 - 0
8 Linux  0:00:00  0.650  0.080 0.011 0.023 0.031 1159 9
9 Linux  0:00:00  0.650  0.613 0.086 0.173 0.173 - 0
10 Windows Server 2008  0:00:00  0.651  0.066 0.065 0.195 0.397 151 30
11 Linux  0:00:00  0.652  0.234 0.011 0.154 0.154 - 0
12 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.781  0.173 0.026 0.055 0.175 479 57
13 Linux  0:00:00  0.781  0.142 0.063 0.127 0.127 - 0
14 unknown  0:00:00  1.039  0.117 0.116 0.207 0.207 - -
15 FreeBSD  0:00:00  1.040  0.098 0.061 0.123 0.155 533 17
16 Linux  0:00:00  1.297  0.088 0.053 0.107 0.107 - 0
17 Linux  0:00:00  1.554  0.202 0.017 0.159 0.159 - 0
18 Linux  0:00:00  1.554  0.072 0.066 0.133 0.133 - 0
19 Linux  0:00:00  1.935  0.155 0.010 0.496 0.522 1617 41
20 Linux  0:00:00  1.940  0.078 0.010 0.168 0.168 25762 1
21 Linux  0:00:00  2.567  0.148 0.101 0.202 0.303 161 16
22 Linux  0:00:00  2.571  0.103 0.015 0.198 0.381 105 19
23 Linux  0:00:00  3.065  0.148 0.011 1.268 1.379 829 91
24 FreeBSD  0:00:00  3.065  0.182 0.073 0.144 0.144 - 0
25 unknown  0:00:00  3.189  0.095 0.054 0.212 0.212 - 0
26 unknown  0:00:00  3.193  0.092 0.062 0.139 0.266 309 39
27 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  3.558  0.119 0.076 0.175 0.499 198 64
28 Linux  0:00:00  3.576  0.158 0.114 0.262 0.578 80 25
29 Linux  0:00:00  3.817  0.213 0.024 0.050 0.050 - 0
30 Linux  0:00:00  3.836  0.268 0.008 0.205 0.399 230 45
31 Linux  0:00:00  4.414  0.122 0.067 0.179 0.179 - 0
32 unknown  0:00:00  4.545  0.140 0.091 0.190 0.379 222 42
33 Linux  0:00:00  4.557  0.117 0.069 0.138 0.139 - 0
34 Linux  0:00:00  5.019  0.251 0.080 0.394 0.718 163 53
35 Linux  0:00:00  5.019  0.235 0.089 0.343 0.660 327 104
36 Linux  0:00:00  5.963  0.112 0.078 0.149 0.149 - 0
37 Linux  0:00:00  6.667  0.189 0.017 0.154 0.154 - 0
38 Linux  0:00:00  6.667  0.199 0.082 0.165 0.165 - 0
39 Linux  0:00:00  6.675  0.081 0.007 0.018 0.019 - -
 

Report from 29-May-2015 08:15 till 30-May-2015 08:15

Generated on 30-May-2015 08:20

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.