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  0.123 0.010 0.267 0.316 1303 64
2 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.084 0.015 0.031 0.046 573 9
3 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.128 0.016 0.034 0.092 904 52
4 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.069 0.021 0.044 0.044 - 0
5 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.151 0.022 1.309 1.439 655 85
6 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.168 0.050 0.102 0.103 2518 3
7 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.256 0.051 0.106 0.106 - 0
8 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.061 0.053 0.135 0.243 215 23
9 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.120 0.054 0.132 0.210 439 34
10 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.179 0.055 0.110 0.188 322 25
11 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.111 0.055 0.130 0.130 - 0
12 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.090 0.056 0.110 0.110 - 0
13 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.189 0.056 0.112 0.112 - -
14 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.082 0.060 0.408 0.408 - 0
15 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.142 0.063 0.147 0.149 - -
16 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.192 0.067 0.209 0.210 - 0
17 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.000  0.104 0.069 0.141 0.871 101 74
18 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.111 0.069 0.139 0.180 406 17
19 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.149 0.071 0.148 0.338 284 54
20 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.153 0.071 0.174 0.299 281 35
21 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.072 0.072 0.145 0.145 - 0
22 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.161 0.072 0.152 0.195 262 11
23 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.150 0.073 0.159 0.203 339 15
24 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.329 0.074 0.389 0.708 169 54
25 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.000  0.147 0.077 0.229 0.555 217 71
26 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.215 0.081 0.165 0.579 71 29
27 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.248 0.082 0.163 0.163 - 0
28 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.000  0.098 0.096 0.324 0.636 150 47
29 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.246 0.102 0.342 1.098 291 220
30 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.126 0.103 0.202 0.202 - -
31 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.259 0.123 0.247 0.494 152 38
32 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.200 0.124 0.575 0.913 195 66
33 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.183 0.126 0.253 0.382 126 16
34 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.201 0.129 0.266 0.548 84 24
35 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.191 0.151 0.300 0.300 - 0
36 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.190 0.155 0.226 0.227 - -
37 Linux  0:00:00  0.521  0.125 0.078 0.156 0.156 - 0
38 unknown  0:00:00  0.522  0.102 0.021 0.587 0.636 879 43
39 unknown  0:00:00  1.163  0.085 0.020 0.136 0.136 15854 1
40 unknown  0:00:00  1.164  0.189 0.124 0.674 1.054 192 73
41 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  2.059  0.064 0.128 0.258 0.635 144 54
42 Linux  0:00:00  2.062  0.300 0.091 0.360 0.636 79 22
43 Linux  0:00:00  6.468  0.228 0.087 0.564 1.669 55 60
44 Linux  7:51:21  89.949  0.084 0.064 0.144 9.790 3 30
 

Report from 31-Aug-2014 21:07 till 1-Sep-2014 21:06

Generated on 1-Sep-2014 21:13

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.