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 average first byte time 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  2.685  0.086 0.008 0.022 0.023 - -
2 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.084 0.011 0.024 0.031 1131 9
3 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.180 0.026 0.056 0.174 485 57
4 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.075 0.045 0.092 0.092 - 0
5 FreeBSD  0:00:00  1.548  0.100 0.061 0.122 0.154 536 17
6 Linux  0:00:00  3.797  0.110 0.060 0.123 0.123 - 0
7 Linux  0:00:00  1.548  0.154 0.062 0.124 0.124 - 0
8 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.068 0.063 0.126 0.127 2015 3
9 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.179 0.065 0.129 0.129 - 0
10 Linux  0:00:00  1.038  0.066 0.068 0.136 0.136 - 0
11 FreeBSD  0:00:00  2.317  0.194 0.068 0.138 0.139 - 0
12 Linux  0:00:00  2.561  0.127 0.073 0.143 0.143 - 0
13 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.104 0.066 0.148 0.148 - 0
14 unknown  0:00:00  1.938  0.117 0.065 0.149 0.281 296 39
15 Linux  0:00:00  3.193  0.208 0.024 0.156 0.156 - 0
16 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.266 0.011 0.157 0.157 - 0
17 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  1.809  0.130 0.077 0.158 0.492 195 65
18 Linux  0:00:00  4.528  0.197 0.021 0.162 0.162 - 0
19 Linux  0:00:00  2.062  0.192 0.014 0.164 0.164 - 0
20 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.066 0.082 0.165 0.165 - 0
21 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.124 0.080 0.169 0.169 - -
22 Linux  0:00:00  4.528  0.193 0.082 0.171 0.171 - 0
23 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.640 0.084 0.171 0.171 - 0
24 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.169 0.066 0.176 0.176 - 0
25 Linux  0:00:00  1.167  0.075 0.023 0.179 0.179 21731 1
26 unknown  0:00:00  3.065  0.156 0.091 0.191 0.380 221 42
27 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.132 0.093 0.191 0.191 - -
28 Windows Server 2008  0:00:00  0.000  0.073 0.068 0.194 0.391 155 30
29 Linux  0:00:00  2.703  0.250 0.009 0.197 0.379 245 45
30 Linux  0:00:00  1.933  0.157 0.100 0.200 0.301 161 16
31 unknown  0:00:00  3.185  0.112 0.050 0.203 0.203 - 0
32 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.182 0.110 0.205 0.205 - -
33 Linux  0:00:00  3.567  0.112 0.027 0.252 0.449 98 19
34 Linux  0:00:00  3.193  0.162 0.115 0.264 0.575 81 25
35 Linux  0:00:00  3.185  0.249 0.089 0.339 0.658 325 104
36 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.059 0.063 0.400 1.089 89 62
37 Linux  0:00:00  3.185  0.271 0.079 0.403 0.719 167 53
38 Linux  0:17:40  9.685  0.170 0.011 0.493 0.519 1556 41
39 Linux  0:19:19  11.401  0.141 0.012 1.209 1.321 814 91
 

Report from 1-Jun-2015 17:25 till 2-Jun-2015 17:19

Generated on 2-Jun-2015 17:28

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.