Reduce latency (ping) with VPN [game servers - far location]

There is no way VPN will reduce your ping, as stated above it's based on connection quality and distance. The only way actually VPN would give you reduced network latency is with better routing vs non VPN networking... but i seriously doubt such situation can actually happen.
VPN like any other type of proxy service will actually make it worse due to additional latency of the VPN service itself.

Mate look at first comment under the article you sent... and there will be my confirmation. I said its unlikely not its impossible. The network design itself always try to reach the final network point (server/host) within the fastest route, thats what routers are for.
I said unlikely since i seriously doubt some VPN company can have better network infrastructure that is already allowing you to reach US hosts without VPN, it would even be simply not cost effective for that company instead of using that infrastructure.

You can minimize the latency by getting faster internet from your provider but that will help to a certain point. If you can have latency bellow 20ms to the nearest local server (for example using speedtest.net) there is simply nothing you can personally do about it after that certain point its more important how exactly the information travels over the network then the initial ISP latency.

Edit: So that answer from the support guy is also not perfectly clear, it might be your ISP has a bad network infrastructure which makes this latency overhead it might be the Argentina-USA interconnect or whatever the route is. Remember local ISP also uses some global network services and if all ISP's in the country uses the same global network provider (network carrier) then also ISP can do nothing about it.

Now thats a really good question.... but to the VPN provider, maybe they will tell you what kind of magic is that


Btw made edit2 with pingplotter in previous post to expand your curiosity

140ms is in general what we see even in commercial connections to argentina.

Pretty much the only way to get to argentina is via fiber that runs along the coast and eventually end up in miami, it not like someone has managed to cut a fiber though the jungle yet. Most countries like bolivia and paraguay actually go though argentina so their latency is higher.

So lets look at a over simplistic example. Say the game company uses ISP1 in the USA. You use ISP2 and they have a fiber connection from buenos aries to sau paulo brazil. ISP2 buys service from ISP3 to get to other location but ISP3 only has a fiber connection on the undersea fiber between sau paulo and portugal. ISP3 also has a connection on the fiber from portugal to the NAP of america in miami.

So you traffic would go. your house---buenos aires---sau paulo---lisbon---miami---server in USA. Pretty bad going all the way to europe.

So now comes VPN guy. They have a office in sau paulo that has a connection to ISP2 and ISP4 who has a direct fiber to miami.

So if you were to buy from VPN guy you traffic would go Your house--- buenos aires---sau paluo---vpn (get new ip)---miami---server in the USA.

In the second case you would get better performance from a VPN but this is only true because ISP2 does not have a direction connection to ISP4 and the VPN service is providing that interconnection.

In most cases it is the reverse you would have to go longer distance to go all the way to VPN location....what would happen if the nearest VPN data center was in australia.

Most times you can do nothing about this because you have no choice in your ISP and who they connect to.

As a note the path example I gave is not all made up. Telefonica does a lot of business in south america, since they are based in spain they have a lot more capacity on the fiber between brazil and europe than on the fiber from brazil and miami. Some times traffic will not always follow the optimum route in their network.....if you are a corporate customer who buys directly from them though they can adjust this.

That was only a example....but we actually did see that problem.

Your traffic from the ping plot you posted when I was posting my other post show go directly to miami using global crossing (level3). It then for what ever reason uses telia to go across the USA. It is a little high at 60ms from miami to san jose california but the best you will ever see that is maybe 35ms.

The only way you can get faster connection is if you could go the other way. There is a fiber that runs from santiago chile to southern california. Most times we see about 95ms on that connection. The main problem would be is there a fiber than runs between buenos aires and santiago directly over land.....ie over the mountains rather than goes all the way around in the ocean.

So if you could find a ISP that has a connection via chile maybe you could get about 125ms to california. A number of years ago we asked one of the ISP if such a fiber existed and they indicated there was a government project to construct it but I have heard nothing since.

For a large telco company that has offices in every country in the world.

Why? Because they are trying to sell you the service to use their product.

The only way you can reduce latency with a VPN site that is near where you want, is if magically you had 0 ping to the VPN site.

They are using this logic, you are 1,000km from the server, the VPN is only 30km from the server, so clearly 30km has less ping. Issue is that you still have 970km to go before you hit that VPN server and the overhead of the VPN connection will very likely lower your speed over what you would see.