Back to BlogChoosing a Poland VPS starts with the workload and the networks your users rely on. A fast connection to a nearby test server is useful evidence, but it answers a different question from a ping arriving from London or Vilnius. On 18 September 2026, we measured both: throughput from our Warsaw host platform and inbound latency to our Warsaw Looking Glass from 16 European cities.
Our Warsaw network benchmark report brings together two Ookla Speedtest results, 48 Globalping probes and downloadable measurement data. Here is what those results mean when choosing a location for an application.
What the Warsaw speed tests measured
We ran Speedtest CLI on host kvm-lps-pl05 against two servers in Warsaw. The GSL Networks server recorded 14,031.41 Mbps download and 8,795.76 Mbps upload, with 0.38 ms idle latency. The Skynet DC server recorded 9,026.88 Mbps download and 6,555.09 Mbps upload, with 0.86 ms idle latency. Both tests reported 0.0% packet loss.
The original GSL Networks result and Skynet DC result identify the destinations and measurements. Rounded, these are 14.03/8.80 Gbps and 9.03/6.56 Gbps download/upload respectively.
These are host-platform measurements, not a promise that each VPS can sustain those rates. A customer's throughput depends on the chosen plan, destination, route and conditions at the time. The difference between the two Warsaw results is itself a useful reminder to test more than one endpoint.
Latency from 16 European cities
The Globalping snapshot ran from 09:42:18 to 09:48:20 UTC on 18 September. It targeted 37.235.48.250, our permanent Warsaw Looking Glass IPv4 address. Each of 16 source cities contributed three probes, with 16 ping packets per probe. All 48 ping probes returned results. These measurements describe connectivity to the Looking Glass, rather than application response time inside a customer VPS.
| Source city | Probe-average RTT range |
|---|---|
| Warsaw | 0.79–1.28 ms |
| Frankfurt | 16.98–26.47 ms |
| Amsterdam | 21.30–42.78 ms |
| Vilnius | 9.15–51.29 ms |
| Paris | 27.97–33.73 ms |
| London | 29.07–86.32 ms |
The local Warsaw probes averaged around one millisecond. Farther away, the source network mattered as well as geography. The Vilnius probes ranged from 9.15 to 51.29 ms, while London ranged from 29.07 to 86.32 ms. A single city label therefore hides meaningful differences between providers and routes. If your customers use a particular access network, test from that network before treating a location average as representative.
Packet loss and the limits of a short snapshot
Across the ping tests, 766 of 768 packets received replies. One Frankfurt OVH probe and one Paris Scaleway probe each missed one of 16 packets, or 6.25% within that individual sample. The aggregate was approximately 0.26%. This short run cannot establish long-term packet loss or an uptime figure, and it should not be described as a loss-free European test.
The report also provides MTR output using the same probe selections after the pings. MTR helps investigate route differences, but a router failing to answer every diagnostic packet does not by itself establish loss at the destination. Read intermediate-hop results alongside the final destination and repeat measurements when investigating an issue.
Choosing a Warsaw VPS for your workload
For websites and APIs serving Polish users, the local latency results are a useful starting point. For a service with users across Europe, the wider route measurements help identify which networks deserve a closer test. Large downloads depend on available throughput; interactive requests depend on latency as well as application and database performance. Neither ping nor Speedtest alone measures the complete user experience.
Our Poland VPS plans in Warsaw run at Equinix WA1. Choose CPU, memory and storage for the application, then check the current plan's network allowance and limits. The dedicated PolandVPS.net website brings the location, product options and network evidence together.
Before ordering, use the Warsaw Looking Glass to examine routes, and test towards its address from the networks that matter to you. Repeat at different times if peak-hour behaviour is important. Keep inbound and outbound measurements separate: internet paths can differ by direction.
This is an EDIS Global report on our own infrastructure. We publish the endpoints, sample sizes and source data so readers can assess the findings and repeat relevant tests. The measurements are a dated snapshot, not a performance guarantee.