Unless you have some real heavy server side data processing going on, your main bottleneck with be simple network bandwidth. I assume your tour is very video heavy with an average of 350MB. Over what time span does a viewer need to obtain that amount of data?

I find 350MB for 8 minutes of a static photo panorama experience quite a lot actually. Are you sure this is the bandwidth you need per viewer?

"10TB monthly" isn't the same as bandwidth, but rather the data-plan. Bandwidth is the max your provider can output at any given time.30K views * 350mb does equal a bit more than 10TB, but you can't assume the bandwidth requirements will be stable 24/7. If the mass of the viewers come from 1 timezone, you'll have to do that in 12 hours.

Lets just take a 350MB per 8 minutes per user.. or roughly 40megabyte per minute per user. This would mean that, on average you need about 5mbps per user. (assuming no peaks and everything averaging out). On a 100mbit up line, this would mean you could cater roughly and optimistically 20 people at full speed, so this would be your peak number.. If you expect a peak somewhere during the day that is higher, you'll need gigabit or faster ( gigabit up-link would cater 200 people ).

Lets assume that there are 12 active hours a day where your site if being visited and that the visits are neatly spread. 1 Month worth of half days is about 5580 times an 8 minute tour. If you have 20 people, on average, every 8 minutes, this means you can server up 111600 panorama's monthly in that timeslot. (roughly 40 TB of data)

So, if the 350MB estimate is correct, then on average, in theory, you be able to serve up the expected amount of viewed tours on a 100mbit uplink with a 10TB cap.

The CPU and ram are not going to be the big issue... max throughput is.

But really, instead of trying to figure out how to server that amount of data I'd have a look at where all that bulk is going.. Are the pano images properly multi-res and compresses sensibly? Are the hotspot media elements of a suitable size and hosted correctly?

Things like PHP, database queries or accessing a lot of small files have a big impact on CPU and memory usage, but you'll just be serving up mostly big files which won't be massively parallel. Interface files will be loaded once.

My dev server has no problem using most of it's bandwidth without the CPU breaking a sweat.

I think you have a pretty good idea what you need in throughput, data-plan and storage. Just get something that is easily scalable.

If you want guaranteed high level of service that scales no matter what go with top tier hosting. I use Media Temple, which is excellent. If my needs were greater I would further use their distributed cloud service. I hear great things about Amazon's Cloud service as well. It is what IVRPA uses, I believe. No matter what the load these hosting solutions will handle it with ease.

ANY cheap hosting solution, no matter what they claim, will fail you. (Lesson learned more than once.)

I'm in the process of looking for a hosting solution for video files for a project we're working on. What are people having success with right now for delivering video? The video size that we will be using will be 4096x2048 or greater. Is anybody additionally using any field of view rendering solutions? Thanks