terrahost's new Nigeria location – benchmark & mini-review

Initially this began as a “easy” evaluation of the brand new @terrahost Nigeria location, however because it makes little sense to benchmark an nearly empty node I do not make any statements on the node efficiency half (processor, reminiscence, disk) apart from confirming that, sure, you’ll be able to anticipate the sort of efficiency you understand from terrahost Norway; brief, it is a actually, actually quick Ryzen 5k beast with a really quick NVMe.

What does make sense although and actually is a query fairly a couple of bear in mind is how good (or unhealthy) the brand new location’s connectivity is. Right here you go … plus some element, further information (like route high quality) and observations and ideas:

Community Intro

Whereas one is perhaps shocked how truly not off the web map Nigeria is with greater than a handful of worldwide cables (fiber) and one more and fats one coming in 2023, after contemplating some related components and performing some testing I can say with fairly some confidence that terrahost NG is linked to London through ‘Glo-1’. Attention-grabbing sidenote: Glo-1, not like the overwhelming majority of cables, appears to not be below us-american or european management however within the fingers of a nigerian provider and ISP, and goes on to London (extra exactly Bude, UK) except for a brief side-branch to Ghana (a neighbouring nation).

So, I suppose the puzzle of why the whole lot from terrahosts nigerian location goes through London is solved. FWIW, plainly terrahost made a very sensible selection, each wrt the brand new location and the hyperlink.

Concerning the route information for every location I am placing the primary hops frequent to all targets proper right here:

[gateway].terrahost.com < 1 ms
ipnxtelecoms, NG Lagos. 3 hops < 1 ms
ipnxtelecoms, London, 1 hop (direct through Glo-1) 93 ms
HE, London 95 ms

All the next route infos for every goal are to be understood to observe this “frequent header”. Additionally word a couple of further presumably attention-grabbing targets.

Listed below are the outcomes, based mostly on a bit over 200 runs, midway sorted by area:

US SJC softlayer [F: 0]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 47.4 – min 45.5 (96.1%), max 49.0 (103.4%)
Ping [ms]: avg 230.0 – min 226.2 (98.4%), max 233.2 (101.4%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 231.1 – min 226.3 (97.9%), max 237.7 (102.8%)

traceroute:
HE London, 2 hops 95 ms
[cross Atlantic]
[Entering networklayer.com network] 163 ms
networklayer.com Chicago, 2 hops 181 ms
networklayer.com Denver, 1 hop 202 ms
[Entering networklayer.com San Jose] 229 ms
networklayer.com San Jose, 6(!) hops 229 ms
– 19 hops whole –
———————————————————————

US LAX clouvider [F: 48]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 35.2 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 51.4 (145.9%)
Ping [ms]: avg 224.3 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 232.5 (103.6%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 224.6 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 240.1 (106.9%)

traceroute:
HE London, 2 hops 95 ms
[cross Atlantic]
HE New York, 1 hop 161 ms
HE Ashburn, 1 hop 164 ms
HE Los Angeles, 2 hops 220 ms
. . .
Clouvider LAX, 2 hops 229 ms
goal 225 ms
– 16 hops whole –
———————————————————————

US DAL leaseweb [F: 31]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 46.1 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 58.1 (126.0%)
Ping [ms]: avg 194.6 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 199.4 (102.5%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 195.6 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 370.3 (189.4%)

traceroute:
HE, London,1 hop 96 ms
. . .
Zayo, London, 1 hop 96 ms
. . .
Zayo, Colorado, 1 hop 198 ms
. . . [3 hops]
Zayo, Dallas, 2 hops 198 ms
Leaseweb, Dallas, 2 hops 198 ms
goal 198 ms
– 18 hops whole –
———————————————————————

US NYC clouvider [F: 25]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 51.2 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 70.5 (137.7%)
Ping [ms]: avg 161.7 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 167.3 (103.4%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 169.0 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 279.7 (165.5%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 1 hop 96 ms
Telia, London, 2 hops 96 ms
Telia, New York, 2 hops 163 – 180 ms
Clouvider, New York 7 hops 165 ms
goal 165 ms
– 19 hops whole –
———————————————————————

US WDC leaseweb [F: 15]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 58.0 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 68.7 (118.6%)
Ping [ms]: avg 167.9 – min 167.4 (99.7%), max 188.8 (112.4%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 168.3 – min 167.5 (99.5%), max 188.8 (112.2%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 2 hops 96 ms
HE, New York, 1 hop 161 ms
HE, Ashburn, 3 hops, 166 ms
Leaseweb, Washington, 1 hop 166 ms
goal 166 ms
– 14 hops whole –
———————————————————————

BR PA ufpr.br [F: 0]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 32.2 – min 21.1 (65.4%), max 36.1 (111.9%)
Ping [ms]: avg 310.3 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 335.1 (108.0%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 311.8 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 353.6 (113.4%)

traceroute
HE, London, 2 hops 95 ms
HE, New York, 1 hop 161 ms
HE, Ashburn, 1 hop 164 ms
HE, Atlanta, 1 hop 179 ms
HE, Miami, 2 hops 197 ms
RNP (nationwide edu community), Miami, 2 hops 196 ms
. . .
RNP, numerous, 5 hops ~ 315 ms
goal 316 ms
– 22 hops whole –
———————————————————————

BR SAO softlayer [F: 0]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 35.6 – min 19.7 (55.3%), max 41.1 (115.3%)
Ping [ms]: avg 271.5 – min 270.5 (99.6%), max 328.4 (121.0%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 275.8 – min 270.6 (98.1%), max 357.0 (129.4%)

traceroute
HE, London, 2 hops 95 ms
. . .
networklayer, London, 1 hop 96 ms
networklayer, New York, 1 hop 162 ms
. . .
sl-reverse.com, Sao Paolo, 3 hops 276 ms
goal 27 ms
– 16 hops whole –
[Note: both networklayer and sl-reverse seem to be softlayer (IBM) siblings]
———————————————————————

CL UNK ufro.cl [F: 1]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 33.7 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 38.2 (113.3%)
Ping [ms]: avg 330.5 – min 327.7 (99.2%), max 355.5 (107.6%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 339.2 – min 327.7 (96.6%), max 638.2 (188.2%)

traceroute:
. . .
Telxius (Telefonica), London, 1 hop 95 ms
Telxius , ??, 170 ms
Telxius, Seattle, 195 ms
Telxius, Chile(?), 2 hops 304 ms
Gtd, Santiago, 2 hops, 307 ms
goal 331 ms
– 15 hops whole –
[Note: Telefonica seems to be quite secretive wrt. routing. Also, they seem to be tightly intertwined with Gtd]
———————————————————————

FR PAR testdebit [F: 0]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 98.4 – min 48.7 (49.5%), max 112.9 (114.7%)
Ping [ms]: avg 103.0 – min 101.8 (98.8%), max 106.0 (102.9%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 103.8 – min 102.0 (98.3%), max 106.0 (102.1%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 1 hop 95 ms
HE, Paris, 1 hop 106 ms
. . .
Bouygues, France, 3 hops 104 ms
goal 104 ms
– 13 hops whole –
———————————————————————

IT MIL softlayer [F: 0]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 95.2 – min 74.2 (77.9%), max 98.3 (103.2%)
Ping [ms]: avg 112.5 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 127.8 (113.6%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 112.6 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 127.8 (113.5%)

traceroute
HE, London, 2 hops 95 ms
. . .
networklayer, London, 1 hop 102 ms
. . . [2 hops]
networklayer, Milano, 2 hops 115 ms
goal 114 ms
– 15 hops whole –
———————————————————————

TR UNK 185.65.204.169 [F: 2]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 74.0 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 77.3 (104.4%)
Ping [ms]: avg 142.3 – min 141.5 (99.5%), max 163.9 (115.2%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 142.6 – min 141.6 (99.3%), max 164.6 (115.4%)

traceroute
. . .
Telia, London, 1 hop 94 ms
. . .
Cogent, London, 1 hop 94 ms
Cogent, Amsterdam, 1 hop 101 ms
Cogent, Frankfurt, 1 hop 107 ms
Cogent, Munich, 1 hop 113 ms
Cogent, Vienna, 1 hop 119 ms
Cogent, Bratislava, 1 hop 120 ms
Cogent, Budapest, 1 hop 149 ms
Cogent, ???, 1 hop 127 ms
Cogent, Sofia, 1 hop 132 ms
Cogent, Istanbul, 2 hops 142 ms
binaryracks, Istanbul, 3 hops 143 ms
goal 141 ms
– 24 hops whole –
[Note (opinion): “Cogent – why use an express train when you can use a tramway stopping every 300 meters!”]
———————————————————————

GR UNK otenet.gr [F: 102]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 34.8 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 79.5 (228.1%)
Ping [ms]: avg 81.0 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 309.4 (382.0%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 85.4 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 995.0 (1165.7%)

traceroute
HE, London, 1 hop 95 ms
HE, Prague, 1 hop 112 ms
HE, Vienna, 1 hop 118 ms
HE, Sofia, 1 hop 131 ms
HE, Athens, 1 hop 142 ms
. . .
OTEnet, Greece ?? hops ca. 143 ms
17 * *^C
goal 143 ms
– 16 to twenty+ hops whole –
[Note: This target is only here as a particularly nasty test, don’t care, just remember to stay away from OTEnet.gr.
It’s remarkable btw, that terrahost’s Nigeria node actually has a success rate of about 50% with that target; that’s an impressive result]
———————————————————————

NO OSL terrahost [F: 11]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 68.4 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 92.1 (134.8%)
Ping [ms]: avg 122.0 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 126.6 (103.7%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 122.3 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 144.5 (118.1%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 1 hop 95 ms
HE, Amsterdam, 1 hop 113 ms
HE, Stockholm, 1 hop 120 ms
. . .
terrahost, 2 hops 123 ms
goal 125 ms
– 13 hops whole –
———————————————————————

IS UNK system.is [F: 0]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 80.0 – min 29.8 (37.3%), max 86.5 (108.1%)
Ping [ms]: avg 133.1 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 143.4 (107.7%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 133.4 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 144.3 (108.2%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 1 hop 95 ms
HE, Amsterdam, 1 hop 101 ms
. . .
simnet.is, Iceland, 1 hop 143 ms
Gagnaveita, Iceland, 1 hop 141 ms
goal 143 ms
– 12 hops whole –
———————————————————————

RU MOS hostkey [F: 0]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 64.9 – min 21.0 (32.4%), max 82.8 (127.6%)
Ping [ms]: avg 139.4 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 142.7 (102.4%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 139.4 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 142.9 (102.5%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 1 hop 95 ms
HE, Amsterdam, 1 hop 102 ms
HE, tockholm, 1 hop 120 ms
. . . [2 hops]
goal 142 ms
– 12 hops whole –
———————————————————————

RO BUC 185.183.99.8 [F: 0]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 77.8 – min 22.8 (29.3%), max 88.1 (113.3%)
Ping [ms]: avg 129.0 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 171.4 (132.9%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 129.6 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 171.4 (132.3%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 1 hop 95 ms
HE, Manchester, 1 hop 99 ms
. . .
M247, London, 1 hop, 101 ms
M247, “ddos-protected-ip” 101 ms
. . . [7 hops]
goal 135 ms
– 19 hops whole –
———————————————————————

NL AMS leaseweb [F: 0]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 102.4 – min 25.9 (25.3%), max 113.6 (110.9%)
Ping [ms]: avg 97.9 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 102.0 (104.2%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 98.4 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 104.1 (105.8%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 2 hops 95 ms
. . . [ 4 hops]
goal 100 ms
– 13 hops whole –
———————————————————————

DE FRA core-backbone [F: 29]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 77.8 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 106.8 (137.2%)
Ping [ms]: avg 104.7 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 106.9 (102.1%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 105.2 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 108.3 (102.9%)

traceroute
HE, London, 2 hops 95 ms
. . .
core-backbone, Amsterdam, 1 hop 99 ms
core-backbone, Frankfurt, 1 hop 106 ms
goal 106 ms
– 12 hops whole –
———————————————————————

UK LON clouvider [F: 1]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 90.9 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 122.0 (134.2%)
Ping [ms]: avg 92.0 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 95.8 (104.1%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 92.1 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 96.0 (104.3%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 2 hops 95 ms
. . . [7 hops]
Clouvider, London, 2 hops 94 ms
goal 95 ms
– 18 hops whole –
———————————————————————

AU MEL dediserve [F: 6]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 25.8 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 28.6 (110.9%)
Ping [ms]: avg 389.6 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 401.5 (103.1%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 390.8 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 405.9 (103.9%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 2 hops 95 ms
HE, New York, 1 hop 161 ms
HE, Ashburn, 1 hops 175 ms
HE, Los Angeles, 1 hops 222 ms
. . .
coloau, “Los Angeles” (truly AU), 1 hop 391 ms
coloau, NW, 1 hop 390 ms
coloau, Melbourne, 2 hops 389 ms
. . . [between 1 and countless hops]
goal 391 ms
– 17 to twenty+ hops whole –
———————————————————————

JP TOK linode [F: 35]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 29.4 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 38.5 (130.7%)
Ping [ms]: avg 298.9 – min 297.8 (99.6%), max 302.5 (101.2%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 299.4 – min 297.8 (99.5%), max 304.4 (101.7%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 1 hop 95 ms
HE, New York, 1 hop 159 ms
HE, Chicago, 2 hops 180 ms
HE, Seattle, 1 hops 218 ms
HE, Tokyo, 3 hops 301 ms
Linode, Tokyo, 1 hop 301 ms
goal 302 ms
– 16 hops whole –
———————————————————————

CN UNK cqu.edu.cn [F: 1]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 27.5 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 29.5 (107.5%)
Ping [ms]: avg 382.4 – min 379.8 (99.3%), max 395.3 (103.4%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 386.0 – min 379.8 (98.4%), max 537.1 (139.1%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 1 hop 95 ms
HE, Paris, 1 hop 104 ms
HE, Marseille, 1 hop 111 ms
HE, Singapore, 1 hop 250 ms
HE, Hongkong, 2 hops 282 ms
. . .
CN Edu&Analysis community, 1 hop 350 ms
. . .
CN Edu&Analysis community, 7 hops 384 ms [some hopping in circles]
. . . [11 hops]
^C [I won’t wait all day for the chinese intelligentsia (a joke with a smirk) to end
their funny routing loops]
– 24 to 30+ hops whole [Bring lots of free time along …] –
———————————————————————

CN HK leaseweb [F: 29]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 33.7 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 42.0 (124.4%)
Ping [ms]: avg 274.4 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 292.3 (106.5%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 280.5 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 294.6 (105.0%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 1 hop 100 ms
HE, Paris, 1 hop 104 ms
HE, Marseille, 1 hop 111 ms
HE, Singapore, 1 hop 250 ms
HE, Hongkong, 2 hops 280 ms
. . . [2 hops]
leaseweb, Hongkong, 2 hops 287 ms
goal 276 ms
– 17 hops whole –
———————————————————————

CN HK mirror.rackspace.hk [F: 6]
[results hidden]

[This is actually *not* a server in Hongkong but one on the us-american East Coast.
Which means that Rackspace are playing – very dirty – games with dozens of distros
and major foss projects!]
– no hops for liars and scammers –
———————————————————————

SG SGP leaseweb [F: 38]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 36.1 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 46.5 (129.0%)
Ping [ms]: avg 250.0 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 286.6 (114.6%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 250.7 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 295.5 (117.9%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 1 hop 95 ms
HE, Paris, 1 hop 107 ms
HE, Marseille, 1 hop 112 ms
HE, Singapore, 1 hop 250 ms
. . . [2 hops]
leaseweb, Singapore, 2 hops 245 ms
goal 255 ms [Uhm, losing 10 ms within SGP?]
– 15 hops whole –
———————————————————————

IN MUM webwerks [F: 0]
DL [Mb/s]: avg 42.6 – min 24.6 (57.8%), max 50.9 (119.4%)
Ping [ms]: avg 249.6 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 268.7 (107.6%)
Internet ping [ms]: avg 255.7 – min 0.0 (0.0%), max 322.7 (126.2%)

traceroute:
HE, London, 3 hops 94 ms
Vodafone, London, 3 hops 119 ms
. . . [2 hops]
Vodafone, India 223 ms
goal 225 ms
– 16 hops whole –

My resumé:

As I already hinted earlier I am anticipating this new terrahost location to draw a lot of prospects, each from inside and outside Nigeria. Easy motive: whereas routes with 95 ms added in my appear a bit mee to us European, North-People, and so forth. terrahosts merchandise there extremely seemingly is THE entry and exit port to/fro Africa, and searching on the rising fiber capability and the financial efforts of the entire area one would not should be a genius to acknowledge that terrahost is sitting on a fairly unique (up to now) and promising “mine”.

Whereas I’d have most well-liked to see far more twelfe99 in my assessments of the terrahost VPS I additionally see that, particularly contemplating the situation, not going for the the highest spot however for respectable high quality at a wonderful value was the fitting choice. And I can not complain, HE gave me little motive to be sad, their a part of the routes isn’t an issue – not like for instance Cogent who fairly reliably f_cks routing up, surpassed solely by the chinese language authorities’s reasearch and edu community which leads me to imagine that some essential chinese language official thinks that greater numbers, each in time and in hop rely are higher …
(No, I am in no way anti-China, however when a rustic reliably f_cks up in some actually essential facet I name a spade a spade)

Again to terrahost: kudos, @RobMonster and terrahost group, your considering was sensible, your plan was sensible, and your implementation is nicely finished. And your routing is not unhealthy in any respect both and I feel your choice to go along with HE the place it is smart was one (and a pleasant smile to HE from me, you have bought fairly respectable )

And now, why are you losing time studying my rumblings as a substitute of terrahost’s store? What? “Not but obtainable” you say? Rob Monster and terrahost group, MOVE! Open the doorways to the store already! Or would you like me to ship you an image of my face to inspire you? (Belief me, there are much less horrifying nightmares than seeing my face …) *g

🔥 Hot and trending web hostings deals 🔥

HostingsCoupons.com - Web Hostings Coupons, Sales, Deals and Discounts
Logo