Testing Background & Methodology

So here's the deal - I've been testing these two popular VPS providers for the past couple weeks, and honestly? The results were kinda surprising. Started with BandwagonHost because of their budget-friendly reputation, then moved to Vultr since everyone keeps mentioning their "brilliant performance."

Decided to put both through the wringer with some proper benchmarks - you know, the usual suspects: Geekbench for CPU muscle, iperf3 for network speeds, and sysbench for database performance. Nothing fancy, just real-world stuff that actually matters when you're running production workloads.

Table of Contents

• Test Environment & Setup
• Raw Benchmark Results
• BandwagonHost Overview
• Vultr Deep Dive
• Performance Analysis & Comparison
• Use Case Scenarios
• Pricing Breakdown
• FAQ Section
• Final Verdict

Test Environment & Setup {#test-environment}

BandwagonHost Test Server:

• Location: Los Angeles, CA
• IP: 198.35.46.78 (AS25820 IT7 Networks)
• Plan: 2 vCPU, 1GB RAM, 20GB SSD
• Price: $49.99/year

Vultr Test Server:

• Location: New York, NY
• IP: 144.202.17.92 (AS20473 Vultr Holdings)
• Plan: 1 vCPU, 1GB RAM, 25GB SSD
• Price: $6.00/month

Raw Benchmark Results {#benchmark-results}

BandwagonHost - Geekbench 5 Results

System Information
  Operating System              Ubuntu 20.04.3 LTS
  Kernel                        Linux 5.4.0-91-generic x86_64
  Model                         QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996)
  Motherboard                   N/A
  BIOS                          SeaBIOS 1.13.0-1ubuntu1.1

Processor Information
  Name                          Intel Xeon E5-2630 v4
  Topology                      1 Processor, 2 Cores
  Identifier                    GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 79 Stepping 1
  Base Frequency                2.20 GHz
  L1 Instruction Cache          32.0 KB x 2
  L1 Data Cache                 32.0 KB x 2
  L2 Cache                      256 KB x 2
  L3 Cache                      25.0 MB

Memory Information
  Size                          974 MB

Single-Core
  File Compression              856
  Navigation                    1024
  HTML5 Browser                 987
  PDF Renderer                  892
  Photo Library                 743
  Clang                         965
  Text Processing               891
  Asset Compression             912
  Object Detection              421
  Background Blur               1246
  Horizon Detection             1189
  Object Remover                876
  HDR                           934
  Photo Filter                  1087
  Ray Tracer                    832
  Structure from Motion         1034

Single-Core Score             908

Multi-Core
  File Compression              1542
  Navigation                    2016
  HTML5 Browser                 1892
  PDF Renderer                  1734
  Photo Library                 1456
  Clang                         1887
  Text Processing               1743
  Asset Compression             1798
  Object Detection              821
  Background Blur               2387
  Horizon Detection             2298
  Object Remover                1689
  HDR                           1823
  Photo Filter                  2089
  Ray Tracer                    1612
  Structure from Motion         2001

Multi-Core Score              1768

Vultr - Geekbench 5 Results

System Information
  Operating System              Ubuntu 22.04.1 LTS
  Kernel                        Linux 5.15.0-48-generic x86_64
  Model                         QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)
  Motherboard                   N/A
  BIOS                          SeaBIOS 1.15.0-1

Processor Information
  Name                          Intel Xeon Platinum 8163
  Topology                      1 Processor, 1 Core
  Identifier                    GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 85 Stepping 4
  Base Frequency                2.50 GHz
  L1 Instruction Cache          32.0 KB
  L1 Data Cache                 32.0 KB
  L2 Cache                      1.00 MB
  L3 Cache                      33.0 MB

Memory Information
  Size                          980 MB

Single-Core
  File Compression              1143
  Navigation                    1356
  HTML5 Browser                 1298
  PDF Renderer                  1189
  Photo Library                 987
  Clang                         1278
  Text Processing               1167
  Asset Compression             1201
  Object Detection              556
  Background Blur               1634
  Horizon Detection             1548
  Object Remover                1156
  HDR                           1223
  Photo Filter                  1423
  Ray Tracer                    1089
  Structure from Motion         1356

Single-Core Score             1198

Network Performance - iperf3 Results

BandwagonHost Network Test:

iperf3 -c speedtest.la.bwg.net -p 5201
Connecting to host speedtest.la.bwg.net, port 5201
[  4] local 198.35.46.78 port 42168 connected to 23.252.104.12 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth
[  4]   0.00-1.00   sec  12.5 MBytes   105 Mbits/sec
[  4]   1.00-2.00   sec  11.9 MBytes  99.8 Mbits/sec
[  4]   2.00-3.00   sec  12.1 MBytes   101 Mbits/sec
[  4]   3.00-4.00   sec  11.8 MBytes  98.9 Mbits/sec
[  4]   4.00-5.00   sec  12.3 MBytes   103 Mbits/sec
[  4]   5.00-6.00   sec  11.7 MBytes  98.2 Mbits/sec
[  4]   6.00-7.00   sec  12.0 MBytes   101 Mbits/sec
[  4]   7.00-8.00   sec  11.9 MBytes  99.9 Mbits/sec
[  4]   8.00-9.00   sec  12.2 MBytes   102 Mbits/sec
[  4]   9.00-10.00  sec  11.8 MBytes  99.1 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth
[  4]   0.00-10.00  sec   120 MBytes   101 Mbits/sec                  sender
[  4]   0.00-10.00  sec   118 MBytes  99.2 Mbits/sec                  receiver

Vultr Network Test:

iperf3 -c ny-us-ping.vultr.com -p 5201
Connecting to host ny-us-ping.vultr.com, port 5201
[  4] local 144.202.17.92 port 38924 connected to 208.167.249.27 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth
[  4]   0.00-1.00   sec  28.7 MBytes   241 Mbits/sec
[  4]   1.00-2.00   sec  29.3 MBytes   246 Mbits/sec
[  4]   2.00-3.00   sec  28.9 MBytes   242 Mbits/sec
[  4]   3.00-4.00   sec  29.1 MBytes   244 Mbits/sec
[  4]   4.00-5.00   sec  28.8 MBytes   242 Mbits/sec
[  4]   5.00-6.00   sec  29.4 MBytes   247 Mbits/sec
[  4]   6.00-7.00   sec  28.6 MBytes   240 Mbits/sec
[  4]   7.00-8.00   sec  29.2 MBytes   245 Mbits/sec
[  4]   8.00-9.00   sec  28.7 MBytes   241 Mbits/sec
[  4]   9.00-10.00  sec  29.1 MBytes   244 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth
[  4]   0.00-10.00  sec   290 MBytes   243 Mbits/sec                  sender
[  4]   0.00-10.00  sec   288 MBytes   241 Mbits/sec                  receiver

Database Performance - sysbench Results

BandwagonHost MySQL Test:

sysbench oltp_read_write --mysql-host=localhost --mysql-user=root --mysql-password=test123 --mysql-db=sbtest --tables=10 --table-size=100000 --threads=8 --time=300 run

sysbench 1.0.18 (using system LuaJIT 2.1.0-beta3)

Running the test with following options:
Number of threads: 8
Initializing random number generator from current time

Initializing worker threads...

Threads started!

SQL statistics:
    queries performed:
        read:                            212184
        write:                           60624
        other:                           30312
        total:                           303120
    transactions:                        15156   (50.52 per sec.)
    queries:                             303120  (1010.39 per sec.)
    ignored errors:                      0      (0.00 per sec.)
    reconnects:                          0      (0.00 per sec.)

General statistics:
    total time:                          300.0078s
    total number of events:              15156

Latency (ms):
         min:                                   89.23
         avg:                                  158.34
         max:                                  523.78
         95th percentile:                      287.38
         sum:                              2400234.89

Vultr MySQL Test:

sysbench oltp_read_write --mysql-host=localhost --mysql-user=root --mysql-password=test123 --mysql-db=sbtest --tables=10 --table-size=100000 --threads=4 --time=300 run

sysbench 1.0.20 (using bundled 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:                            189336
        write:                           54096
        other:                           27048
        total:                           270480
    transactions:                        13524   (45.08 per sec.)
    queries:                             270480  (901.60 per sec.)
    ignored errors:                      0      (0.00 per sec.)
    reconnects:                          0      (0.00 per sec.)

General statistics:
    total time:                          300.0195s
    total number of events:              13524

Latency (ms):
         min:                                   67.45
         avg:                                   88.76
         max:                                  389.23
         95th percentile:                      161.51
         sum:                              1200456.78

BandwagonHost Overview {#bandwagonhost-overview}

Alright, so BandwagonHost has been around for quite a while now - they're basically the budget VPS king that everyone talks about on forums like LowEndBox. They run their VPS hosting on premium hardware with RAID-10 SAS disks and E5 CPUs, using their custom KiwiVM control panel.

What's interesting about BWH is that they've carved out this niche for really affordable annual plans. Starting at $49.99/year for a 2 vCPU, 1GB RAM, 20GB SSD setup, which is honestly pretty decent for the price point. Their main selling points include:

• KiwiVM Control Panel - Custom-built, actually works pretty well
• Free DC Migration - You can hop between 12+ datacenters without fees
• CN2 GIA Lines - Optimized routes to Asia (big deal for some users)
• 99.99% Uptime - Pretty solid reliability track record

The catch? Well, they're definitely more bare-bones compared to the big cloud providers. No fancy auto-scaling or managed services - just straightforward VPS hosting.

Vultr Deep Dive {#vultr-deep-dive}

Vultr is kinda the opposite approach - they're going for that "premium cloud" experience. 100% KVM virtualization with SSD storage across their global infrastructure. Been using them on and off for about 3 years now, and they've definitely improved their game.

Their regular VPS plans start around $6/month, but you can get dedicated CPU instances starting at $60/month if you need guaranteed resources. What sets Vultr apart:

• 32 Global Locations - Seriously impressive datacenter coverage
• Hourly Billing - Pay for what you use
• One-Click Apps - WordPress, Docker, Kubernetes, etc.
• Block Storage - Additional SSD volumes you can attach
• Load Balancers & Firewalls - Managed networking features

The downside? It gets expensive fast if you're not careful with resource usage.

Performance Analysis & Deep Comparison {#performance-analysis}

CPU Performance Battle 🥊

The Geekbench results tell an interesting story here. Vultr clearly wins on single-threaded performance with a score of 1198 vs BWH's 908 - that's about 32% faster. Makes sense since Vultr is running newer Intel Xeon Platinum 8163 processors vs BandwagonHost's older E5-2630 v4 chips.

But here's where it gets interesting - BandwagonHost's multi-core score of 1768 absolutely destroys Vultr's single-core setup. Of course, that's because BWH gives you 2 vCPUs vs Vultr's 1 vCPU in this price range.

Winner: Depends on your workload

• Single-threaded apps: Vultr
• Multi-threaded apps: BandwagonHost

Network Speed Reality Check 📡

This is where Vultr just crushes it. 243 Mbits/sec vs 101 Mbits/sec - that's more than double the bandwidth!

BandwagonHost's network is... well, it's adequate. Around 100 Mbps is fine for most web applications, but if you're doing heavy file transfers or serving lots of media content, you'll definitely feel the limitation.

Vultr's network infrastructure is just in a different league. Those 32 datacenters aren't just for show - they've invested heavily in premium bandwidth.

Winner: Vultr (no contest)

Database & I/O Performance 💾

The sysbench results are kinda fascinating actually. BandwagonHost managed 50.52 transactions per second vs Vultr's 45.08 TPS. That's about 12% better performance from BWH, which is surprising given the older hardware.

Looking at the latency numbers though, Vultr has much more consistent performance:

• BWH: 158.34ms average, 287.38ms 95th percentile
• Vultr: 88.76ms average, 161.51ms 95th percentile

Winner: Vultr (better consistency matters more than peak TPS)

Use Case Scenarios & Recommendations {#use-cases}

BandwagonHost is Perfect For:

• Budget-conscious projects 💰
• Learning/development environments
• Low-traffic websites & blogs
• Long-term projects (annual billing saves money)
• Applications targeting Asian markets (CN2 routes)

Vultr Shines For:

• Production applications requiring reliability
• E-commerce sites with traffic spikes
• Global applications needing multiple regions
• Development teams wanting fast deployment
• Applications with unpredictable resource needs

Pricing Breakdown & Value Analysis {#pricing}

Cost Comparison (12 months):

• BandwagonHost: $49.99 total
• Vultr: $72.00 total

BWH is about 31% cheaper over a year, but Vultr gives you more flexibility and better performance.

Cancellation & Refunds (Sort Of)

Here's something that might surprise you - neither provider offers traditional refunds. BandwagonHost is pretty upfront about their no-refund policy, especially on promotional plans. Vultr uses hourly billing, so you can just delete your instance and stop paying, but there's no getting money back for unused credit.

The workaround? Both offer trial periods of sorts:

• Vultr: $250 free credits for new accounts
• BandwagonHost: 30-day money-back on select plans (read the fine print!)

Real Usage Experience & Gotchas ⚠️

After running both servers for a few weeks, here's what I actually noticed:

BandwagonHost Reality Check:

• Setup was smooth - KiwiVM interface is actually pretty decent
• Performance is consistent - no weird CPU throttling issues
• Support is... basic - ticket system works, but don't expect hand-holding
• Network can be sluggish during peak hours (US evening)
• Free migration is awesome - switched from LA to NY in like 10 minutes

Vultr Real-World Experience:

• Deployment is stupid fast - new instance in under a minute
• Control panel is polished - feels like a proper cloud platform
• Networking features actually work - tried the firewall, no issues
• Costs can spiral if you're not watching usage
• Support is responsive - live chat during business hours

FAQ Section {#faq}

Q: Which provider has better uptime?

A: Both claim 99.9%+, but from my monitoring, Vultr edges out slightly better. BWH had one 4-hour outage in LA datacenter last month.

Q: Can I run Docker containers on both?

A: Yep! Both support Docker. Vultr has one-click Docker marketplace apps, BWH requires manual setup.

Q: Which is better for WordPress hosting?

A: For a single WordPress site with low traffic, BandwagonHost is fine and cheaper. For anything serious, go with Vultr.

Q: Do they offer managed services?

A: Nope, both are unmanaged VPS. You're responsible for OS updates, security patches, etc.

Q: Can I upgrade/downgrade plans easily?

A: Vultr: Yes, very flexible. BandwagonHost: Limited options, mostly need to buy a new plan.

Q: Which has better DDoS protection?

A: Vultr includes basic DDoS protection. BandwagonHost... well, pray you don't get targeted 😅

Q: Are there bandwidth overages?

A: BWH: Hard limits, service suspended if exceeded. Vultr: Overage billing at $0.01/GB.

Q: Which is better for cryptocurrency/blockchain nodes?

A: Vultr, hands down. Better network, more reliable, and they don't explicitly prohibit crypto activities.

Final Verdict & Scoring {#conclusion}

Alright, time for the real talk. After putting both through their paces, here's how they stack up:

BandwagonHost Final Score: 7.2/10 ⭐

Strengths:

• Unbeatable price for annual commitments
• Solid basic performance
• Free datacenter migrations
• Good for Asia-Pacific connectivity

Weaknesses:

• Limited network bandwidth
• Older hardware
• Basic support
• No hourly billing flexibility

Vultr Final Score: 8.6/10 ⭐⭐

Strengths:

• Superior network performance
• Modern infrastructure & features
• Excellent global coverage
• Flexible billing model
• Better support quality

Weaknesses:

• Higher costs, especially long-term
• Can get expensive with add-ons
• Overkill for simple use cases

The Bottom Line

If you're on a tight budget and need a solid VPS for basic workloads, BandwagonHost delivers incredible value. It's not fancy, but it gets the job done.

For anything business-critical or if you value performance and flexibility over cost savings, Vultr is the clear winner.

My recommendation? Start with Vultr's free credits to test your application, then consider BandwagonHost if you're looking to optimize costs for stable, long-term projects.

Review Source: VPSJudge offers real-world VPS hosting reviews, benchmark tests, and expert comparisons to help you choose the right provider.

About the Author

Senior VPS Reviewer | Linux Architect | Network Infrastructure Consultant

Expertise:

• Global VPS Reviews: 10+ yrs, 500+ providers, performance/network/I/O/cost analysis
• Linux Optimization: High-concurrency architectures, kernel tuning, KVM & containers (Docker/K8s)
• Network Solutions: CDN acceleration, TCP/IP stack, DDoS mitigation, edge nodes

Certifications: LPIC-3 · CCNP · AWS SAP · CKA

Key Projects:

• Global VPS Performance Map: Auto-monitoring 30+ country nodes, quarterly industry reports
• Million-concurrency Hybrid CDN: Reduced latency 47%, saved $220K+/yr bandwidth
• Tech Columnist: 60+ in-depth articles on Phoronix/LowEndTalk