Compare The Actual Measurement Reports Of Taiwan Vps Address Speed And Stability From Different Suppliers For Easy Selection Reference.

1. test background and purpose

1.1 this test focuses on the network latency, bandwidth throughput, packet loss rate and availability indicators of taiwan node vps.
1.2 the goal is to provide a selection reference for sites or game servers that need to be served in taiwan.
1.3 covers decision-making points related to hosting, domain name resolution, cdn caching, and ddos protection.
1.4 the test uses a unified script and environment to avoid interference caused by configuration differences.
1.5 test results are used to compare the performance of different suppliers in the same scenario.

2. testing methods and sampling strategies

2.1 tools used: ping (icmp), mtr, iperf3 (tcp/udp), curl/wget (http download), prometheus collection script.
2.2 sampling period: 72 consecutive hours, sampling every 5 minutes, a total of 864 samples.
2.3 indicator calculation: average delay, jitter (jitter), packet loss rate, 99th percentile delay and availability (uptime).
2.4 test scenario: comparison of directly going to the public ip of the vps, going to the vps through domain name resolution, and going to the edge node through cdn (cloudflare).
2.5 additional tests: record download speed and cpu/network usage in high-concurrency (50 concurrent) http download scenarios.

3. test environment and supplier configuration example

3.1 provider a (locally hosted): configuration example: 2 vcpu, 4gb ram, 50gb nvme, bandwidth 1gbps peak, sla includes ddos cleaning all year round.
3.2 provider b (international cloud business taiwan node): configuration example: 4 vcpu, 8gb ram, 100gb nvme, default bandwidth 500mbps, enable ddos protection package on demand.
3.3 provider c (low-cost shared type): configuration example: 2 vcpu, 2gb ram, 40gb sata ssd, bandwidth 100mbps shared, no independent ddos.
3.4 the test client is located at two different exits of the shanghai computer room and the tokyo computer room to evaluate the cross-border effect.
3.5 all vps systems are ubuntu 22.04, and the network parameters are not specially optimized to reflect the default user experience.

4. measured data of key indicators (summary table)

4.1 the following table shows the average, 99p latency and availability of 72-hour sampling summary.
4.2 the bandwidth in the table is the tcp peak throughput measured by iperf3; http is the average time taken to download a 100mb file.
4.3 packet loss is the average packet loss rate of icmp sample statistics; jitter is the delay variance.
4.4 availability is the connection rate within 72 hours (no response window is counted as unavailable).
4.5 the table is displayed in the center to facilitate visual comparison of the performance of different suppliers.

5. real cases and fault analysis

5.1 case a: an e-commerce company deployed a shopping cart service on provider a. it encountered a short-term network jitter within 72 hours. mtr determined that it was an instantaneous packet loss on the upstream link, and the provider completed the cleanup within 20 minutes.
5.2 case b: a saas's traffic peak was triggered by an external attack on provider b's taiwan node. if ddos packets were not enabled, short-term bandwidth saturation and response prolongation were observed; it returned to normal after cleaning was enabled.
5.3 case c: a content site found on provider c that tcp multiplexing efficiency was poor in high-concurrency download scenarios, resulting in the actual throughput of iperf being lower than the nominal bandwidth and the http time consuming being significantly longer.
5.4 diagnostic tool output example: iperf3 -c ip -p10 obtained tcp throughput 930mbps (provider a) and 120mbps (provider c).
5.5 recommended records: save mtr, tcpdump and system indicators to facilitate communication with suppliers to locate link or node problems.

6. selection suggestions and operation and maintenance precautions

6.1 if you need the lowest latency and high bandwidth (such as game servers, real-time communication), give priority to provider class a local backbone nodes.
6.2 when globally available and flexible resources are required, provider b cloud vendors located close to taiwan can be used as a compromise. pay attention to ddos policies and pay-as-you-go billing.
6.3 for non-critical businesses that are budget-sensitive but do not have high stability requirements, you can choose provider class c low-cost solution and cooperate with cdn to relieve traffic pressure.
6.4 no matter which one you choose: it is recommended to cooperate with cdn for static content distribution, use anycast dns, and evaluate ddos protection sla and traffic cleaning capabilities.
6.5 before production deployment, conduct stress testing and long-term connectivity monitoring for more than 72 hours (prometheus+alertmanager is recommended), and keep test logs for claim or fault filing.