On average across the year,
New Hampshire, United States is approximately as hot as
Sioux Falls, South Dakota
.
New Hampshire, United States has an average temperature of 9°C/48°F and Sioux Falls, South Dakota has an average temperature of 9°C/48°F.
New Hampshire, United States's hottest month is July, with an average maximum temperature of 29°C/84°F, which is not hotter than Sioux Falls, South Dakota's hottest month (also July, with an average maximum temperature of 30°C/86°F).
On average across the year, New Hampshire, United States is approximately as cold as Sioux Falls, South Dakota . New Hampshire, United States has an average minimum temperature of 3°C/37°F and Sioux Falls, South Dakota has an average minimum temperature of 3°C/37°F.
On average across the year,
yes, New Hampshire, United States has more rain than
Sioux Falls, South Dakota. New Hampshire, United States has an average annual rainfall of 1196mm and Sioux Falls, South Dakota has an average annual rainfall of 781mm.
New Hampshire, United States's wettest month is October, with an average monthly rainfall of 130mm, which is wetter than Sioux Falls, South Dakota's wettest month (June, with an average monthly rainfall of 119mm).
The midpoint of New Hampshire, United States is approximately 1,258 miles (2,024km) east of Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
No, New Hampshire, United States is not further west than Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
Yes, New Hampshire, United States is further east than Sioux Falls, South Dakota. The midpoint of New Hampshire, United States is further east by approximately 1,271 miles (2,045km).
No, New Hampshire, United States is not further north than Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
Yes, New Hampshire, United States is further south than Sioux Falls, South Dakota. The midpoint of New Hampshire, United States is further south by approximately 25 miles (40km).
The midpoint of Sioux Falls, South Dakota is approximately 1,258 miles (2,024km) west of New Hampshire, United States.
Yes, Sioux Falls, South Dakota is further west than New Hampshire, United States. The midpoint of Sioux Falls, South Dakota is further west by approximately 1,271 miles (2,045km).
No, Sioux Falls, South Dakota is not further east than New Hampshire, United States.
Yes, Sioux Falls, South Dakota is further north than New Hampshire, United States. The midpoint of Sioux Falls, South Dakota is further north by approximately 25 miles (40km).
No, Sioux Falls, South Dakota is not further south than New Hampshire, United States.
Yes, New Hampshire is more populated than Sioux Falls.
New Hampshire has a population of 1,388,992 and Sioux Falls has a population of 171,544
which means that New Hampshire has 1,217,448 more people than Sioux Falls.
That makes New Hampshire 8 times more populated than Sioux Falls.
No, New Hampshire is not less populated than Sioux Falls.
New Hampshire has a population of 1,388,992 and Sioux Falls has a population of 171,544
which means that New Hampshire has 1,217,448 more people than Sioux Falls.
That makes New Hampshire 8 times more populated than Sioux Falls.
No, Sioux Falls is not more populated than New Hampshire.
Sioux Falls has a population of 171,544 and New Hampshire has a population of 1,388,992
which means that Sioux Falls has 1,217,448 fewer people than New Hampshire.
That makes Sioux Falls 8 times less populated than New Hampshire.
Yes, Sioux Falls is less populated than New Hampshire.
Sioux Falls has a population of 171,544 and New Hampshire has a population of 1,388,992
which means that Sioux Falls has 1,217,448 fewer people than New Hampshire.
That makes Sioux Falls 8 times less populated than New Hampshire.