Comments on: Amazon CloudFront vs. Rackspace Cloud Files CDN Performance

By: serg

serg — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 09:26:24 +0000

Tried Rackspace cloudfiles yesterday, in comparing with Amazon cloudfront the RS CF has:
1) no cname support makes RS CF useless for us.
2) worse download speed than amazon (for 10Mbytes file), checked by host-tracker.com, WGETed from our dedicated server @ Fortress ITX (100mbit) and WGETed by myself (my home 15Mbit down/up link)

Conclusion: keep staying with Amazon.

P.S. response time makes no sense for us, cause there are 2.5-5 mbytes downloadable trial versions of our software, the download speed is most important.

By: Sahan

Sahan — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 23:56:04 +0000

RS Cloud is the best, however as to my experience the first time request for content is really slow (outside us).

For instant I optimized a site and visited it from my area (Sri Lanka). Holy crap ! my shared hosting provider to better than that. But the second visit is really good [ I cleared the cache before visit ]

So now the trick I do is after publish files to the CDN, request them from around the world (IPs).

It does the job…..

By: 3 Potential Acquisitions For Google, Yahoo and Microsoft | Digital Media Buzz

Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:03:43 +0000

[...] Chrome, an OS that already runs exclusively in the cloud. Rackspace is largely viewed as a major threat to Amazon’s cloud superiority and an acquisition could finally provide Google with the [...]

By: Cloud Links for December 6, 2009

Cloud Links for December 6, 2009 — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 05:46:23 +0000

[...] Amazon CloudFront vs. Rackspace Cloud Files CDN Performance [...]

By: How fast is the Cloud Files CDN? | Rackspace Cloud Insider

How fast is the Cloud Files CDN? | Rackspace Cloud Insider — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:58:51 +0000

[...] We actually run across a blog for a user of both Cloud Files and CloudFront that wanted to check performance between the two services and graphed everything out for you. You can find his blog at http://chrismeller.com/2009/10/amazon-cloudfront-vs-rackspace-cloudfiles-cdn-performance/#more-642. [...]

By: Maykel Rodriguez

Maykel Rodriguez — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:00:02 +0000

Hi JB,

I can setup a trial account on EdgeCast for you. Just let me know if you are interested.

Thanks,
Maykel

By: Maykel Rodriguez

Maykel Rodriguez — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:40:08 +0000

Hi Chris,

I’ve got similar results in our comparison of CloudFront and EdgeCast, but in our tests the response times of CloudFront were around 150ms average, may I ask what’s the size of the file you were testing? We tested with a 55KB file (jquery.js). I can setup a trial account for you if you want to do some tests, you don’t even need storage since you can use S3 or your own servers as origin storage.

Thanks,
Maykel

By: Mike Howson

Mike Howson — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:31:45 +0000

This is great information. We are currently in the process of choosing a hosting and CDN partner for our own business as well as all of our customer sites — this definitely helps us solidify our decision to use Rackspace and Limelight for hosting and CDN. Thanks!

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 13:27:13 +0000

@Matt

Are you kidding? Do you really need to see throughput numbers on a blog comparing Cloudfiles to Amazon? You’re “client” should probably be looking for someone else to handle their business.

Anybody with an ounce of knowledge on CDN’s knows there would be no comparison. Limelight will be far superior to Amazon for throughput in 99% of cases. And not just a little better they will totally destroy Amazon in that testing.

By: Matt Sawyer

Matt Sawyer — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:42:25 +0000

Chris-

I appreciate the comparison you have here, as I’m currently evaluating these two products for a client.

My only concern with this test is that I would have liked to see some throughput numbers (as this client will be streaming large video files from the CDN).

Any anecdotes worth mentioning on this front?