Best VPS by Disk
Providers ranked by measured disk performance — random IOPS and sequential throughput.
| # | Provider | Score | Relative | Tests |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
91.8 |
|
1 test |
| 2 |
|
90.8 |
|
1 test |
| 3 |
|
87.7 |
|
10 tests |
| 4 |
|
85.8 |
|
2 tests |
| 5 |
|
81.6 |
|
1 test |
| 6 |
|
78.9 |
|
13 tests |
| 7 |
|
73.0 |
|
5 tests |
| 8 | T Timeweb | 72.7 |
|
2 tests |
| 9 |
|
72.5 |
|
3 tests |
| 10 |
|
61.7 |
|
7 tests |
| 11 |
|
59.0 |
|
1 test |
| 12 |
|
39.3 |
|
1 test |
| 13 |
|
33.7 |
|
1 test |
VPS disk: why IOPS beat megabytes per second
Disk is the most underrated number. Plans say «NVMe», but what matters is not megabytes per second — it is random operations, because that is how databases and web apps actually work. We measure with fio: 4K random read and write, sequential throughput, and p95/p99 latency.
All machines are measured by one agent with identical parameters, so the numbers are comparable. Key tests use three passes and a median: one lucky spike does not become a «record».
The selection holds 13 hosts, led by Rj Network at 91.8. The gap between first and last is 58.1 points. That is a lot: the choice here genuinely matters rather than being a matter of taste.
A score is 0–100 within a comparable group, not an absolute value. It is computed half as a position among others and half against a reference «poor → excellent» scale, so the only slow server in a small sample does not get an undeserved zero.
Best VPS for a task
See the methodology for how scores are computed (version 2026.07b).