Leaderboard

Hello, I am a user from mainland China. During my usage, I've noticed that many servers with low load bandwidth usage are actually slower, such as those in Taiwan and Japan. I’d like to offer a suggestion to AirVPN. Personally, I believe the evaluation criteria for server quality should be based on CPU usage over a certain period, such as the average CPU usage over half an hour, rather than load bandwidth. I’ve frequently encountered handshake timeouts when connecting to "sulafat," even though the displayed load bandwidth isn’t high. I suspect this is most likely related to high CPU usage on the server, which causes key resolution timeouts. If I could connect to a server with relatively idle CPU resources, I think the connection quality would be much better. After all, speed is closely tied to protocol overhead. For example, if a 1 Gbit/s server is connected to 100 users using the WireGuard protocol, the server’s load bandwidth might reach up to 900 Mbit/s. However, if it’s connected to 100 users using SSL + OpenVPN TCP protocol, the load bandwidth might only be 400 Mbit/s. Clearly, the latter scenario places a higher burden on the server, yet the load bandwidth appears lower. Therefore, I believe servers with lower CPU usage offer better quality, rather than those with lower load bandwidth. Using average CPU usage as a metric seems more scientific to me. Does my point make sense? Does anyone agree with what I’m saying? Thanks.

Great suggestion!

Can you view the qB log in the WebUI? Or does qbittorrent-nox log to STDERR or something? In any case, qB logs would probably help.