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  0.087 0.007 0.157 0.157 - 0
2 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.087 0.011 0.024 0.032 1062 9
3 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.203 0.024 0.055 0.055 - 0
4 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.212 0.025 0.053 0.178 462 57
5 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.156 0.039 0.474 0.508 1219 41
6 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.082 0.043 0.090 0.090 - 0
7 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.143 0.051 0.208 0.208 - 0
8 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.106 0.060 0.123 0.123 - 0
9 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.107 0.062 0.124 0.156 517 17
10 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.061 0.063 0.521 1.321 84 67
11 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.114 0.063 0.133 0.305 346 60
12 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.167 0.063 0.126 0.126 - 0
13 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.130 0.064 0.128 0.128 - 0
14 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.230 0.065 0.128 0.130 1655 3
15 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.316 0.065 0.132 0.132 - 0
16 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.113 0.066 0.152 0.270 315 37
17 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.080 0.066 0.132 0.132 - 0
18 Windows Server 2008  0:00:00  0.000  0.101 0.067 0.180 0.381 153 31
19 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.113 0.068 0.137 0.137 - 0
20 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.194 0.072 0.142 0.142 - 0
21 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.187 0.073 0.141 0.141 - 0
22 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.000  0.118 0.073 0.150 0.474 212 69
23 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.184 0.079 0.156 0.157 - -
24 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.265 0.079 0.397 0.716 166 53
25 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.118 0.080 0.227 0.227 - -
26 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.051 0.081 0.164 0.164 - 0
27 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.188 0.082 0.166 0.166 - 0
28 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.245 0.087 0.373 0.699 333 109
29 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.642 0.092 0.185 0.185 - 0
30 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.134 0.093 0.182 0.182 - -
31 Citrix Netscaler  0:00:00  0.000  0.166 0.095 0.194 0.385 206 40
32 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.141 0.111 0.218 0.324 153 16
33 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.173 0.112 0.258 0.561 84 25
34 Linux  0:00:00  0.393  0.142 0.009 1.059 1.170 783 87
35 Linux  0:00:00  0.522  0.064 0.009 0.170 0.170 21399 1
36 Linux  0:00:00  1.039  0.241 0.008 0.193 0.376 243 45
37 Linux  0:00:00  1.042  0.098 0.030 0.178 0.367 102 19
38 unknown  0:00:00  2.561  0.150 0.087 0.169 0.169 - 0
39 Linux  0:53:48  23.431  0.291 0.069 0.135 0.135 - 0
 

Report from 25-Apr-2015 11:26 till 26-Apr-2015 11:27

Generated on 26-Apr-2015 11:31

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.