Rj Network vs Vultr
Real-test comparison — higher score is better on every metric (0–100).
Tallinn
Sydney
| Rj Network | Metric | Vultr |
|---|---|---|
|
72.4
|
Overall |
73.4
|
|
89.5
|
Ping |
100.0
|
|
73.1
|
Network speed |
85.5
|
|
29.6
|
CPU |
73.7
|
|
82.9
|
Memory |
97.5
|
|
91.8
|
Disk |
21.6
|
| 1 vCPU · 1 GB RAM | Configuration | 2 vCPU · 8 GB RAM |
On the overall score Rj Network and Vultr are level: 72.4 vs 73.4 out of 100. A gap of 1 points is smaller than the spread between individual passes, so calling an outright winner would be dishonest — look at the individual categories below.
Rj Network is stronger on disk; Vultr — on ping, network speed, CPU and memory.
What that means in practice: for a game server, VPN and anything latency-sensitive, Vultr is the closer fit; for a database and write-heavy work — Rj Network; for file delivery, streaming and backups — Vultr; for builds, encryption and compute-bound tasks — Vultr.
Where the numbers come from: the best published test of Rj Network was taken in Estonia on the 1 vCPU · 1 GB RAM plan, Vultr — in Australia on the 2 vCPU · 8 GB RAM plan. The locations differ, so compare ping and speed with care: they say as much about the route to our control endpoints as about the server itself.
Important: this compares the best published test of each provider, not an average across all their servers. Every result is a snapshot of one machine on the test date — on another node, or a month later, the numbers may differ. The scoring method and raw logs are public, so you can check them yourself.