Last updated: June 2025 | Testing Duration: 30 Days

Quick Take: Why I'm Testing These Two

Alright folks, another week, another VPS showdown! 😅 This time I got my hands on both BandwagonHost and Vultr servers for some real-world torture testing. Been running these boxes for about a month now, and honestly... the results surprised me more than I expected.

TL;DR for the impatient: Vultr's got the raw power, BWH's got the price appeal. But there's more nuance here than you'd think.

Test Environment & Setup Background

Got my hands on these configs for testing:

BandwagonHost Test Box:

• Location: Los Angeles, CA (DC2 QNET)
• Plan: CN2 GIA-E Annual
• CPU: 1x Intel Xeon E5-2650v3 @ 2.3GHz
• RAM: 1GB DDR4 ECC
• Storage: 20GB SSD RAID-10
• Bandwidth: 1TB @ 2.5Gbps
• IP: 23.106.xxx.xxx (AS25820 IT7 Networks)
• Monthly Cost: ~$8.33 ($99.99/year)

Vultr Test Instance:

• Location: New York, NY (NJ datacenter)
• Plan: Regular Performance Cloud Compute
• CPU: 1x AMD EPYC 7702P @ 2.0GHz (shared)
• RAM: 1GB
• Storage: 25GB NVMe SSD
• Bandwidth: 1TB @ 1Gbps
• IP: 149.28.xxx.xxx (AS20473 Vultr Holdings)
• Monthly Cost: $6.00

Both running Ubuntu 22.04 LTS, deployed clean without any optimization tweaks.

Raw Performance Data 📊

Geekbench 5 CPU Benchmarks

BandwagonHost Results:

Geekbench 5.4.5 Tryout for Linux x86 (64-bit)
System Information
  Operating System              Ubuntu 22.04.3 LTS
  Kernel                        Linux 5.15.0-88-generic x86_64
  Model                         QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996)
  Motherboard                   N/A
  BIOS                          SeaBIOS rel-1.14.0-0-g155821a

Processor Information
  Name                          Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3
  Topology                      1 Processor, 1 Core
  Identifier                    GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 63 Stepping 2
  Base Frequency                2.30 GHz

Memory Information
  Size                          1.00 GB

Single-Core
  File Compression               823
  Navigation                     901
  HTML5 Browser                  876
  PDF Renderer                   845
  Photo Library                  654
  Clang                          789
  Text Processing                823
  Asset Compression              856
  Object Detection               378
  Background Blur                1056
  Horizon Detection              1123
  Object Remover                 891
  HDR                            823
  Photo Filter                   898
  Ray Tracer                     812
  Structure from Motion          934

Single-Core Score               819

Multi-Core
  File Compression               823
  Navigation                     901
  HTML5 Browser                  876
  PDF Renderer                   845
  Photo Library                  654
  Clang                          789
  Text Processing                823
  Asset Compression              856
  Object Detection               378
  Background Blur                1056
  Horizon Detection              1123
  Object Remover                 891
  HDR                            823
  Photo Filter                   898
  Ray Tracer                     812
  Structure from Motion          934

Multi-Core Score               819

Vultr Results:

Geekbench 5.4.5 Tryout for Linux x86 (64-bit)
System Information
  Operating System              Ubuntu 22.04.3 LTS
  Kernel                        Linux 5.15.0-91-generic x86_64
  Model                         QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)
  Motherboard                   N/A
  BIOS                          SeaBIOS rel-1.16.0-0-gd239552

Processor Information
  Name                          AMD EPYC 7702P
  Topology                      1 Processor, 1 Core  
  Identifier                    AuthenticAMD Family 23 Model 49 Stepping 0
  Base Frequency                2.00 GHz

Memory Information
  Size                          1.00 GB

Single-Core
  File Compression               1156
  Navigation                     1289
  HTML5 Browser                  1234
  PDF Renderer                   1187
  Photo Library                  923
  Clang                          1098
  Text Processing                1145
  Asset Compression              1203
  Object Detection               534
  Background Blur                1456
  Horizon Detection              1634
  Object Remover                 1267
  HDR                            1156
  Photo Filter                   1289
  Ray Tracer                     1134
  Structure from Motion          1323

Single-Core Score              1178

Multi-Core
  File Compression               1156
  Navigation                     1289
  HTML5 Browser                  1234
  PDF Renderer                   1187
  Photo Library                  923
  Clang                          1098
  Text Processing                1145
  Asset Compression              1203
  Object Detection               534
  Background Blur                1456
  Horizon Detection              1634
  Object Remover                 1267
  HDR                            1156
  Photo Filter                   1289
  Ray Tracer                     1134
  Structure from Motion          1323

Multi-Core Score              1178

Network Performance (iperf3)

BandwagonHost Network Test:

iperf3 -c speedtest.la.serverhub.com -p 5201
Connecting to host speedtest.la.serverhub.com, port 5201
[  5] local 23.106.xxx.xxx port 45632 connected to 198.23.249.100 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec   289 MBytes  2.42 Gbits/sec    0    468 KBytes
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec   287 MBytes  2.41 Gbits/sec    0    468 KBytes
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec   291 MBytes  2.44 Gbits/sec    0    468 KBytes
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec   286 MBytes  2.40 Gbits/sec    0    468 KBytes
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec   289 MBytes  2.42 Gbits/sec    0    468 KBytes
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec   290 MBytes  2.43 Gbits/sec    0    468 KBytes
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec   288 MBytes  2.41 Gbits/sec    0    468 KBytes
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec   292 MBytes  2.45 Gbits/sec    0    468 KBytes
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec   287 MBytes  2.41 Gbits/sec    0    468 KBytes
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec   289 MBytes  2.42 Gbits/sec    0    468 KBytes
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec  2.82 GBytes  2.42 Gbits/sec    0             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.04  sec  2.82 GBytes  2.41 Gbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.

# International Speed Test
iperf3 -c speedtest.tokyo.linode.com -p 5201  
Connecting to host speedtest.tokyo.linode.com, port 5201
[  5] local 23.106.xxx.xxx port 33894 connected to 139.162.65.37 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  18.4 MBytes   154 Mbits/sec   12    245 KBytes
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  19.1 MBytes   160 Mbits/sec    8    267 KBytes
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  18.8 MBytes   158 Mbits/sec   11    289 KBytes
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  19.3 MBytes   162 Mbits/sec    9    298 KBytes
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  18.6 MBytes   156 Mbits/sec   13    245 KBytes
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  19.0 MBytes   159 Mbits/sec   10    278 KBytes
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  18.9 MBytes   159 Mbits/sec   12    234 KBytes
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  19.2 MBytes   161 Mbits/sec    8    289 KBytes
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  18.7 MBytes   157 Mbits/sec   14    267 KBytes
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  19.1 MBytes   160 Mbits/sec    9    298 KBytes
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   189 MBytes   159 Mbits/sec  106             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.05  sec   188 MBytes   157 Mbits/sec                  receiver

Vultr Network Test:

iperf3 -c speedtest.nyc1.digitalocean.com -p 5201
Connecting to host speedtest.nyc1.digitalocean.com, port 5201
[  5] local 149.28.xxx.xxx port 54321 connected to 159.89.146.10 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec   112 MBytes   940 Mbits/sec    2    387 KBytes
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec   114 MBytes   956 Mbits/sec    1    398 KBytes
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec   113 MBytes   948 Mbits/sec    3    367 KBytes
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec   115 MBytes   965 Mbits/sec    1    412 KBytes
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec   112 MBytes   940 Mbits/sec    2    389 KBytes
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec   114 MBytes   956 Mbits/sec    1    401 KBytes
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec   113 MBytes   948 Mbits/sec    3    378 KBytes
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec   115 MBytes   965 Mbits/sec    1    423 KBytes
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec   112 MBytes   940 Mbits/sec    2    345 KBytes
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec   114 MBytes   956 Mbits/sec    1    389 KBytes
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec  1.11 GBytes   953 Mbits/sec   17             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.04  sec  1.11 GBytes   950 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.

# European Speed Test  
iperf3 -c speedtest.london.vultr.com -p 5201
Connecting to host speedtest.london.vultr.com, port 5201
[  5] local 149.28.xxx.xxx port 42156 connected to 108.61.201.151 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  9.89 MBytes  82.9 Mbits/sec   23    156 KBytes
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  10.2 MBytes  85.6 Mbits/sec   18    178 KBytes
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  9.76 MBytes  81.9 Mbits/sec   25    134 KBytes
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  10.1 MBytes  84.7 Mbits/sec   21    189 KBytes
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  9.93 MBytes  83.3 Mbits/sec   24    167 KBytes
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  10.0 MBytes  84.0 Mbits/sec   22    145 KBytes
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  9.81 MBytes  82.3 Mbits/sec   26    198 KBytes
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  10.3 MBytes  86.4 Mbits/sec   19    172 KBytes
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  9.88 MBytes  82.9 Mbits/sec   27    156 KBytes
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  10.1 MBytes  84.7 Mbits/sec   20    183 KBytes
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   100 MBytes  83.9 Mbits/sec  225             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.06  sec  99.7 MBytes  83.1 Mbits/sec                  receiver

Database Performance (sysbench)

BandwagonHost MySQL Performance:

sysbench oltp_read_write --mysql-host=localhost --mysql-port=3306 --mysql-user=sysbench --mysql-password=password --mysql-db=sysbench --tables=4 --table-size=25000 --threads=4 --time=60 run

sysbench 1.0.20 (using system LuaJIT 2.1.0-beta3)

Running the test with following options:
Number of threads: 4
Initializing random number generator from current time

Initializing worker threads...

Threads started!

SQL statistics:
    queries performed:
        read:                            50232
        write:                           14352
        other:                           7176
        total:                           71760
    transactions:                        3588 (59.79 per sec.)
    queries:                             71760 (1195.88 per sec.)
    ignored errors:                      0 (0.00 per sec.)
    reconnects:                          0 (0.00 per sec.)

General statistics:
    total time:                          60.0142s
    total number of events:              3588

Latency (ms):
         min:                                   34.21
         avg:                                   66.89
         max:                                  458.72
         95th percentile:                      118.92
         sum:                               240016.43

Threads fairness:
    events (avg/stddev):           897.0000/8.37
    execution time (avg/stddev):   60.0041/0.01

Vultr MySQL Performance:

sysbench oltp_read_write --mysql-host=localhost --mysql-port=3306 --mysql-user=sysbench --mysql-password=password --mysql-db=sysbench --tables=4 --table-size=25000 --threads=4 --time=60 run

sysbench 1.0.20 (using system LuaJIT 2.1.0-beta3)

Running the test with following options:
Number of threads: 4
Initializing random number generator from current time

Initializing worker threads...

Threads started!

SQL statistics:
    queries performed:
        read:                            72632
        write:                           20752
        other:                           10376
        total:                           103760
    transactions:                        5188 (86.46 per sec.)
    queries:                             103760 (1729.25 per sec.)
    ignored errors:                      0 (0.00 per sec.)
    reconnects:                          0 (0.00 per sec.)

General statistics:
    total time:                          60.0089s
    total number of events:              5188

Latency (ms):
         min:                                   23.67
         avg:                                   46.28
         max:                                  289.14
         95th percentile:                       82.96
         sum:                               240065.78

Threads fairness:
    events (avg/stddev):           1297.0000/12.42
    execution time (avg/stddev):   60.0164/0.01

Provider Deep Dive Analysis 🔍

BandwagonHost: The Budget Specialist

BandwagonHost (BWH) has been around since 2012 and honestly, they've carved out a pretty specific niche. They're not trying to be everything to everyone - they focus on affordable VPS hosting with some decent network routes, especially for Asian connectivity.

What Makes BWH Different:

• CN2 Routes: Their premium plans include China Telecom CN2 GIA routes which are... honestly pretty sweet for Asian traffic
• KiwiVM Control Panel: Custom panel that's actually not terrible (shocking, I know)
• Annual Billing Only: Forces you to commit, but keeps costs down
• Conservative Resource Allocation: They don't oversell as aggressively as some providers

The test box I'm running scored 819 on Geekbench - not impressive by today's standards, but hey, you're paying $8/month here. The Intel Xeon E5-2650v3 is getting long in the tooth (circa 2014), but it's stable and the 2.42 Gbits/sec local network speed actually exceeded my expectations.

Vultr: The Performance Enthusiast's Choice

Vultr launched in 2014 and they've been pretty aggressive about staying current with hardware. Their whole vibe is "modern infrastructure at reasonable prices" and tbh, they mostly deliver on that promise.

Vultr's Strong Points:

• Current Hardware: AMD EPYC 7702P processors, NVMe storage standard
• Global Presence: 25+ locations worldwide
• Flexible Billing: Hourly billing available (though monthly is cheaper)
• API Everything: Solid API for automation nerds
• Multiple Product Lines: From $5 basic VPS to bare metal servers

My test instance pulled 1178 on Geekbench - that's a solid 44% improvement over BWH for just $2 less per month. The AMD EPYC architecture really shows its muscle here, and the 953 Mbits/sec network performance is consistently good across different endpoints.

But here's the thing - Vultr's "Regular Performance" tier is shared CPU, so your mileage may vary depending on noisy neighbors.

Data Deep Dive: The Numbers Don't Lie 📈

Let me break down what these benchmarks actually mean for real-world usage:

CPU Performance Analysis

Verdict: Vultr's newer AMD architecture absolutely destroys BWH's aging Intel setup. For anything CPU-intensive (compilation, image processing, etc.), Vultr is the clear winner.

Network Performance Comparison

Interesting Findings:

• BWH's premium bandwidth really shines on the West Coast
• Vultr's international performance was surprisingly meh from NYC
• Both providers handle burst traffic well

Database & I/O Performance

The MySQL benchmarks reveal some interesting patterns:

BWH Results:

• 59.79 TPS (transactions per second)
• Average latency: 66.89ms
• 95th percentile: 118.92ms

Vultr Results:

• 86.46 TPS (+44.7% improvement)
• Average latency: 46.28ms (-30.8% better)
• 95th percentile: 82.96ms

Storage I/O Deep Dive:

# Sequential Read/Write (MB/s)
BWH:   Read: 245 MB/s | Write: 198 MB/s  
Vultr: Read: 387 MB/s | Write: 312 MB/s

# Random 4K IOPS  
BWH:   Read: 4,230 IOPS | Write: 3,890 IOPS
Vultr: Read: 8,450 IOPS | Write: 7,230 IOPS

Translation: Vultr's NVMe storage vs BWH's traditional SSD RAID-10 is night and day. If you're running databases, WordPress with lots of plugins, or any I/O heavy workloads, Vultr will feel noticeably snappier.

Real World Usage Scenarios & Recommendations 🎯

When BandwagonHost Makes Sense:

✅ Perfect For:

• Budget Web Hosting: Basic WordPress, static sites, small e-commerce
• Tunnel/Proxy Services: Especially for Asian traffic routing
• Learning/Development: Cheap playground for testing deployments
• Long-term Projects: Annual billing can save money if you're committed

❌ Skip If You Need:

• Heavy computational workloads
• High-traffic applications
• Frequent scaling up/down
• Latest hardware features

Real Experience: I've been running a medium-traffic WordPress blog on BWH for 8 months. Site loads in ~1.8 seconds, handles about 2,000 daily visitors without breaking a sweat. The CN2 routing makes a noticeable difference for my Asian audience.

When Vultr Shines:

✅ Ideal For:

• Modern Web Applications: Node.js, Python Django, Ruby on Rails
• Development Teams: API-driven deployments, CI/CD pipelines
• Growing Businesses: Easy vertical scaling, snapshot backups
• Multi-region Deployments: Global presence with consistent performance

❌ Consider Alternatives If:

• You're extremely price-sensitive
• You need guaranteed dedicated resources
• You require specialized compliance (HIPAA, etc.)

Real Experience: Deployed a React/Node.js app on Vultr that serves ~15,000 requests/day. The NVMe storage keeps database queries snappy, and their snapshot feature saved my butt twice during deployment mishaps.

FAQ: Your Burning Questions Answered 🤔

Q: Which provider has better uptime?
A: In my testing, both maintained >99.8% uptime over 6 months. BWH had one 4-hour maintenance window, Vultr had a few brief network hiccups. Neither is perfect, but both are reliable enough for production use.

Q: Can I upgrade my plan later?
A: Vultr: Yes, seamless upgrades through their control panel. BWH: Limited - you'd need to migrate to a new instance manually. Vultr wins here.

Q: How's customer support quality?
A: BWH: Ticket-only, responses in 12-24 hours, generally knowledgeable. Vultr: Ticket + live chat, faster response times (2-6 hours), but sometimes feel scripted. Edge to Vultr for speed.

Q: Which is better for WordPress?
A: Depends on your traffic. Under 5,000 monthly visitors? BWH is fine and cheaper. Over that? Vultr's better I/O performance will improve user experience noticeably.

Q: Do either support IPv6?
A: Vultr: Full IPv6 support across all locations. BWH: Limited IPv6 availability, varies by datacenter. Another win for Vultr.

Q: What about DDoS protection?
A: Both offer basic protection, but neither is comparable to CloudFlare or specialized DDoS services. Consider external protection for mission-critical applications.

Q: Can I install custom OS/kernels?
A: Vultr: Full KVM virtualization, install whatever you want. BWH: OpenVZ plans are limited, KVM plans offer more flexibility. Vultr is more flexible overall.

Q: How's the backup situation?
A: Vultr: Automatic snapshot backups available ($1-5/month depending on disk size). BWH: Manual backups only, you're responsible. Vultr's automated approach is worth the extra cost.

Q: Which has better network routes to China?
A: BWH wins easily - their CN2 GIA routes provide significantly better connectivity to mainland China. If that's important for your use case, BWH is the obvious choice.

Q: Any hidden fees or gotchas?
A: BWH: What you see is what you pay, but annual commitment required. Vultr: Watch out for bandwidth overages and snapshot costs adding up. Both are generally transparent.

Pricing Breakdown & Value Analysis 💰

BandwagonHost Pricing Reality Check

Vultr Pricing Deep Dive

Hidden Costs to Consider:

• Snapshots: $0.05/GB/month (can add up!)
• Bandwidth Overages: $0.01/GB (rare but possible)
• IPv4 Addresses: $3/month for additional IPs