The benchmarks are available here
Tag Archives: hosting
WordPress Hosting – Does Price Give Better Performance?
WordPress.com VIP Review (2018)
WordPress.com VIP participated for the second time in our WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks (2018). This review is based off the results of that test. This year WordPress.com VIP entered in the same Enterprise price tier again.
In the previous test, WP.com VIP aced the Enterprise test and earned the Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance award from Review Signal. Considering who is behind it, the expectations behind WP.com VIP are enormous.
The Product
Plan Name | Plan Monthly Price | Plan Visitors Allowed | Plan Memory/RAM | Plan Disk Space | Plan Bandwidth |
Plan Sites Allowed
|
WordPress.com VIP | $5,000 | Unlimited | Unlimited | Unlimited | Unlimited | 5 |
Performance Review
Load Storm
Plan Tier | Total Requests | Total Errors | Peak RPS | Average RPS | Peak Response Time(ms) | Average Response Time (ms) | Total Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Throughput (MB/s) | Average Throughput (MB/s) |
Enterprise | 1,749,966 | 3 | 1,400.53 | 972.2 | 7,484 | 108 | 147.94 | 118.68 | 82.19 |
The Load Storm test is designed to simulate real users coming to the site, logging in and browsing the site bursting some of the caching mechanisms typically found on managed WordPress hosts.
Three errors out of 1.75 million requests. VIP also had the fastest average response time at 108ms. Simply astonishing.
Load Impact
Plan Tier | Requests | Errors | Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Average Load Time (Seconds) | Peak Average Bandwidth (Mbps) |
Peak Average Requests/Sec
|
Enterprise | 2085775 | 6 | 119.88 | 0.102 | 1860 | 3960 |
The Load Impact test makes sure static caching is effective so that if a page gets a lot of traffic the site will keep responding without issue.
Six errors in over 2 million requests is another top notch performance. VIP also had the lowest average response time of any company.
Uptime
Plan Tier | UptimeRobot | StatusCake |
Enterprise | 99.95 | 100 |
The uptime results were great. 100 and 99.95% is very respectable.
WebPageTest / WPPerformanceTester
Plan Tier | Enterprise |
Dulles | 0.334 |
Denver | 1.112 |
LA | 0.649 |
London | 0.444 |
Frankfurt | 0.353 |
Rose Hill, Mauritius | 0.874 |
Singapore | 0.395 |
Mumbai | 0.544 |
Japan | 0.358 |
Sydney | 0.506 |
Brazil | 0.363 |
I rarely comment about WebPageTest results but WordPress.com VIP deserves a special mention here. There were 11 test locations and VIP was the fastest in 9/11 and was 22 ms and 9 ms behind the fastest in the other two test locations. I've never seen any company be so dominant across the globe in terms of performance.
Plan Tier | PHP Bench | WP Bench |
Enterprise | 9.18 | 798.084597 |
The WPPerformanceTester results were normal.
Conclusion
WordPress.com VIP's sophomore performance didn't experience a slump. In fact, they seemed to have stepped up their game. Not only did they put on a better Load Storm performance, their response times across the globe were fantastic. WordPress.com VIP earned themselves a second Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance award this year and was quite a stand out in many regards in a very crowded and well performing field.
WP Engine Review (2018)
WPEngine [Reviews] participated for the fifth time in our WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks (2018). This review is based off the results of that test. This year WPEngine entered in the Enterprise tier again. In the previous test, WPEngine struggled with the load tests. They returned this year and entered with the most expensive offering in the Enterprise tier and earned themselves a Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance award.
The Product
Plan Name | Plan Monthly Price | Plan Visitors Allowed | Plan Memory/RAM | Plan Disk Space | Plan Bandwidth |
Plan Sites Allowed
|
Premium Dedicated | $5,400 | Capable of 10M+ (no hard limit, depends on site) | N/A | 1TB | Unlimited | 150 |
Performance Review
Load Storm
Plan Tier | Total Requests | Total Errors | Peak RPS | Average RPS | Peak Response Time(ms) | Average Response Time (ms) | Total Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Throughput (MB/s) | Average Throughput (MB/s) |
Enterprise | 1,914,457 | 786 | 1,564.62 | 1,063.59 | 11,541 | 509 | 115.54 | 95.23 | 64.19 |
The Load Storm test is designed to simulate real users coming to the site, logging in and browsing the site bursting some of the caching mechanisms typically found on managed WordPress hosts.
WPEngine's Load Storm test was good. Minimal errors and stable response time.
Load Impact
Plan Tier | Requests | Errors | Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Average Load Time (Seconds) | Peak Average Bandwidth (Mbps) |
Peak Average Requests/Sec
|
Enterprise | 1461819 | 0 | 78 | 0.665 | 1210 | 2780 |
The Load Impact test makes sure static caching is effective so that if a page gets a lot of traffic the site will keep responding without issue.
Zero errors, that's the magic number we love to see. WP Engine aced the Load Impact test.
Uptime
Plan Tier | UptimeRobot | StatusCake |
Enterprise | 99.95 | 99.96 |
WPEngine [Reviews] maintained above 99.9% uptime on both monitors.
WebPageTest / WPPerformanceTester
Plan Tier | Enterprise |
Dulles | 0.436 |
Denver | 1.155 |
LA | 0.948 |
London | 1.155 |
Frankfurt | 1 |
Rose Hill, Mauritius | 2.109 |
Singapore | 1.536 |
Mumbai | 1.891 |
Japan | 1.062 |
Sydney | 1.428 |
Brazil | 1.238 |
The response times on WPT were normal.
Plan Tier | PHP Bench | WP Bench |
Enterprise | 10.766 | 418.4100418 |
The WPPerformanceTester results normal.
Conclusion
After a disappointing 2016 showing, WPEngine [Reviews] stepped up their game and earned a Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance award from Review Signal. It's always good to see companies working to improve their service offering. WPEngine is one of the oldest companies in the WordPress hosting space and they are showing they can support even the largest clients as many new competitors spring up. Great performance from WP Engine.
Presslabs Review (2018)
Presslabs participated for the fourth time in our WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks (2018). This review is based off the results of that test. Presslabs entered a plan into the Enterprise category, one level up from last year's $201-500 range. Last year Presslabs earned an honorable mention in the $201-500 price tier.
The Product
Plan Name | Plan Monthly Price | Plan Visitors Allowed | Plan Memory/RAM | Plan Disk Space | Plan Bandwidth |
Plan Sites Allowed
|
Enterprise | $2599 USD + $0.1/1000 page views | 0 included, all traffic is charged with $0.1/1000 page views | Unmetered | Unmetered | Unmetered |
up to 25 (depending on traffic and requirements)
|
Performance Review
Load Storm
Plan Tier | Total Requests | Total Errors | Peak RPS | Average RPS | Peak Response Time(ms) | Average Response Time (ms) | Total Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Throughput (MB/s) | Average Throughput (MB/s) |
Enterprise | 2,012,822 | 56 | 1,576.23 | 1,118.23 | 10,099 | 208 | 116.54 | 90.85 | 64.75 |
The Load Storm test is designed to simulate real users coming to the site, logging in and browsing the site bursting some of the caching mechanisms typically found on managed WordPress hosts.
An excellent performance on Load Storm from Presslabs. No signs of load and minimal errors.
Load Impact
Plan Tier | Requests | Errors | Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Average Load Time (Seconds) | Peak Average Bandwidth (Mbps) |
Peak Average Requests/Sec
|
Enterprise | 1991403 | 0 | 104.96 | 0.184 | 1980 | 4580 |
The Load Impact test makes sure static caching is effective so that if a page gets a lot of traffic the site will keep responding without issue.
Zero errors and sub 200ms average response time. Excellent.
Uptime
Plan Tier | UptimeRobot | StatusCake |
Enterprise | 100 | 100 |
Perfect.
WebPageTest / WPPerformanceTester
Plan Tier | Enterprise |
Dulles | 0.378 |
Denver | 1.352 |
LA | 0.85 |
London | 0.49 |
Frankfurt | 0.381 |
Rose Hill, Mauritius | 1.335 |
Singapore | 0.485 |
Mumbai | 0.721 |
Japan | 0.66 |
Sydney | 0.551 |
Brazil | 1.336 |
Presslabs' WPT results were good.
Plan Tier | PHP Bench | WP Bench |
Enterprise | 7.215 | 823.0452675 |
The WPPerformanceTester results had the fastest PHP Bench and second fastest WP Bench.
Conclusion
Presslabs stepped up a price tier and improved from honorable mention last year to earning Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance award in 2018 at the Enterprise tier. It's nice to see another worthy competitor in the Enterprise space that can handle large sites.
WP Oven Review (2018)
WP Oven participated for the third time in our WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks (2018). This review is based off the results of that test. This year WP Oven moved up a tier to the $51-100 price tier.
In the previous test, WP oven achieved perfection and earned themselves Top Tier status from Review Signal. They had zero errors on every test and perfect uptime.
The Product
Plan Name | Plan Monthly Price | Plan Visitors Allowed | Plan Memory/RAM | Plan Disk Space | Plan Bandwidth |
Plan Sites Allowed
|
Professional | $79.95 | Unlimited | 8GB | 80GB | 8 TB | Unlimited Sites |
Performance Review
Load Storm
Plan Tier | Total Requests | Total Errors | Peak RPS | Average RPS | Peak Response Time(ms) | Average Response Time (ms) | Total Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Throughput (MB/s) | Average Throughput (MB/s) |
$51-100 | 438,758 | 1 | 342.95 | 243.75 | 10,051 | 370 | 30.96 | 25.71 | 17.2 |
The Load Storm test is designed to simulate real users coming to the site, logging in and browsing the site bursting some of the caching mechanisms typically found on managed WordPress hosts.
WP Oven had a whopping single error on Load Storm and kept a sub 400ms response time. This was the fewest of any company in the price tier. An excellent showing.
Load Impact
Plan Tier | Requests | Errors | Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Average Load Time (Seconds) | Peak Average Bandwidth (Mbps) |
Peak Average Requests/Sec
|
$51-100 | 675881 | 0 | 36.07 | 0.398 | 619 | 1380 |
The Load Impact test makes sure static caching is effective so that if a page gets a lot of traffic the site will keep responding without issue.
WP Oven had zero errors and kept a sub 400ms response time. Perfect.
Uptime
Plan Tier | UptimeRobot | StatusCake |
$51-100 | 99.98 | 99.97 |
Both monitors were above 99.9%, which is good.
WebPageTest / WPPerformanceTester
Plan Tier | $51-100 |
Dulles | 0.406 |
Denver | 1.118 |
LA | 0.739 |
London | 1.124 |
Frankfurt | 1.206 |
Rose Hill, Mauritius | 2.04 |
Singapore | 2.103 |
Mumbai | 2.221 |
Japan | 1.421 |
Sydney | 2.099 |
Brazil | 1.316 |
The WPT results look normal.
Plan Tier | PHP Bench | WP Bench |
$51-100 | 9.634 | 211.1040743 |
The WPPerformanceTester results are normal.
Conclusion
WP Oven proved they could step up a price tier in 2018 and still earn itself Review Signal's Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance award. It's nice to see a relatively unknown company do consistently well in our benchmarks. Another year, another great performance, keep up the great work WP Oven!
Kinsta Review (2018)
Kinsta participated for the fourth time in our WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks (2018). This review is based off the results of that test. This year Kinsta participated in the 25-50, 51-100, 101-200, 201-500, and Enterprise price tiers.
In the previous test, Kinsta earned Top Tier status in all four price brackets it entered. In 2018, Kinsta started offering cheaper plans and has competed in an additional, lower price tier.
The Products
Plan Name | Plan Monthly Price | Plan Visitors Allowed | Plan Memory/RAM | Plan Disk Space | Plan Bandwidth |
Plan Sites Allowed
|
Starter | $30 | 20000 | - | 5GB | Unlimited | 1 |
Pro | $60 | 40,000 | - | 5GB | Unlimited | 2 |
Business 1 | $100 | 100,000 | - | 10GB | Unlimited | 3 |
Business 2 | $200 | 250000 | - | 20GB SSD | Unlimited | 10 |
Enterprise 1 | $600 | 1 Million | - | 80GB SSD | Unlimited | 60 |
Performance Review
Load Storm
Plan Tier | Total Requests | Total Errors | Peak RPS | Average RPS | Peak Response Time(ms) | Average Response Time (ms) | Total Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Throughput (MB/s) | Average Throughput (MB/s) |
$25-50 | 294,176 | 3 | 225.5 | 163.43 | 10,036 | 355 | 21.38 | 17.58 | 11.88 |
$51-100 | 425,597 | 1 | 332.65 | 236.44 | 10,017 | 377 | 30.98 | 25.62 | 17.21 |
$101-200 | 556,007 | 48 | 436.15 | 308.89 | 10,101 | 375 | 40.45 | 32.44 | 22.47 |
$200-500 | 688,856 | 0 | 543.12 | 382.7 | 4,407 | 358 | 50.08 | 40.47 | 27.82 |
Enterprise | 1,720,465 | 0 | 1,391.42 | 955.81 | 3,906 | 417 | 112.7 | 91.9 | 62.61 |
The Load Storm test is designed to simulate real users coming to the site, logging in and browsing the site bursting some of the caching mechanisms typically found on managed WordPress hosts.
Kinsta aced the Load Storm tests across every tier. Zero errors in multiple price tiers and minimal errors in the others. The response times were kept fast and stable. It scaled up from the smallest test to Enterprise test without issue.
Load Impact
Plan Tier | Requests | Errors | Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Average Load Time (Seconds) | Peak Average Bandwidth (Mbps) |
Peak Average Requests/Sec
|
$25-50 | 337031 | 0 | 18.05 | 0.41 | 304 | 694 |
$51-100 | 672240 | 0 | 36 | 0.416 | 583 | 1300 |
$101-200 | 1016163 | 0 | 54.42 | 0.395 | 863 | 1920 |
$200-500 | 1014718 | 0 | 54.34 | 0.411 | 866 | 1930 |
Enterprise | 1367747 | 0 | 73.4 | 0.802 | 1120 | 2540 |
The Load Impact test makes sure static caching is effective so that if a page gets a lot of traffic the site will keep responding without issue.
Perfection. Zero errors across 5 separate tests.
Uptime
Plan Tier | UptimeRobot | StatusCake |
$25-50 | 100 | 100 |
$51-100 | 100 | 100 |
$101-200 | 100 | 100 |
$200-500 | 100 | 100 |
Enterprise | 100 | 100 |
Perfect. 100% across 5 plans and two separate monitors.
WebPageTest / WPPerformanceTester
Plan Tier | $25-50 | $51-100 | $101-200 | $200-500 | Enterprise |
Dulles | 0.387 | 0.373 | 0.377 | 0.396 | 0.382 |
Denver | 1.287 | 1.163 | 1.411 | 1.134 | 1.245 |
LA | 0.833 | 0.79 | 0.81 | 0.832 | 1.154 |
London | 1.076 | 1.104 | 1.073 | 1.177 | 1.331 |
Frankfurt | 1.014 | 1.009 | 1.01 | 1.031 | 1.103 |
Rose Hill, Mauritius | 2.436 | 2.446 | 2.433 | 2.439 | 2.444 |
Singapore | 1.902 | 1.729 | 1.728 | 1.712 | 1.774 |
Mumbai | 2.114 | 2.279 | 2.221 | 2.119 | 2.108 |
Japan | 1.186 | 1.183 | 1.234 | 1.268 | 1.281 |
Sydney | 1.609 | 1.766 | 1.763 | 1.772 | 1.611 |
Brazil | 1.513 | 1.364 | 1.384 | 1.508 | 1.404 |
WPT test results looked normal.
Plan Tier | PHP Bench | WP Bench |
$25-50 | 8.853 | 1036.26943 |
$51-100 | 8.783 | 1173.70892 |
$101-200 | 8.974 | 1100.110011 |
$200-500 | 9.048 | 1047.120419 |
Enterprise | 8.787 | 1207.729469 |
The WPPerformanceTester results looked normal. The WP Bench results stood out though. The database connections are consistently very fast compared to their competitors at higher price tiers when plans tend to run separate and/or multiple database servers.
Conclusion
Kinsta earned itself five Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance Awards in 2018. It had perfect uptime across every plan. It had zero errors on Load Impact. It had 2/5 Load Storm tests without any errors and only 52 errors total from 3.685 million requests. No signs of stress showed on any test. Kinsta has consistently brought their A game to WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks, this year was no exception. It's nice to see them offering newer, cheaper plans that allow people on smaller budgets access their offerings. A huge congratulations to them for earning the most Top Tier Hosting Performance awards of any company in 2018.
Pantheon Review (2018)
Pantheon participated for the fourth time in our WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks (2018). Last year Pantheon earned two Top Tier awards. This review is based off the results of this years test.
Pantheon stepped up their game this year and earned three Top Tier awards and one honorable mention. Pantheon also has the honor of being the highest rated company on Review Signal for reviews based on customer opinions (84%).
The Products
Plan Name | Plan Monthly Price | Plan Visitors Allowed | Plan Memory/RAM | Plan Disk Space | Plan Bandwidth |
Plan Sites Allowed
|
Personal Plan | $25 | 10,000 (with no overage charges) | 1024MB | 5GB | Unlimited | 1 |
Professional | $100 | 100,000 | 2048 | 20GB | Unlimited | 1 |
Business | $400 | 500,000 | 8192 | 30GB | Unlimited | 1 |
Elite | $1,667 | Unlimited | Unlimited | 100GB+ | Unlimited | 1 |
Performance Review
Load Storm
Plan Tier | Total Requests | Total Errors | Peak RPS | Average RPS | Peak Response Time(ms) | Average Response Time (ms) | Total Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Throughput (MB/s) | Average Throughput (MB/s) |
$25-50 | 292,393 | 5 | 220.72 | 162.44 | 4,287 | 162 | 22.79 | 17.5 | 12.66 |
$51-100 | 445,581 | 37 | 336.4 | 247.54 | 15,086 | 172 | 33.78 | 26.65 | 18.77 |
$200-$500 | 702,823 | 7,065 | 544.27 | 390.46 | 11,462 | 455 | 52.65 | 43.64 | 29.25 |
Enterprise | 1,370,325 | 88 | 1,088.48 | 761.29 | 7,147 | 154 | 106.71 | 85.72 | 59.28 |
The Load Storm test is designed to simulate real users coming to the site, logging in and browsing the site bursting some of the caching mechanisms typically found on managed WordPress hosts.
Pantheon overall did very well. The only issue was in the $200-500 price range it started to show signs of load. It wasn't a huge issue and the plan still earned an honorable mention in the price tier.
Load Impact
Plan Tier | Requests | Errors | Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Average Load Time (Seconds) | Peak Average Bandwidth (Mbps) |
Peak Average Requests/Sec
|
$25-50 | 426896 | 0 | 23.73 | 0.159 | 401 | 880 |
$51-100 | 847397 | 0 | 47.26 | 0.196 | 773 | 1650 |
$200-$500 | 1257940 | 0 | 69.92 | 0.173 | 1020 | 2240 |
Enterprise | 2046874 | 0 | 113.47 | 0.181 | 1660 | 3650 |
The Load Impact test makes sure static caching is effective so that if a page gets a lot of traffic the site will keep responding without issue.
Pantheon aced the LoadImpact tests across every price tier. Zero errors on all four tests and maintained a sub 200 millisecond response time average. Couldn't ask for a better performance.
Uptime
Plan Tier | UptimeRobot | StatusCake |
$25-50 | 100 | 100 |
$51-100 | 100 | 100 |
$200-$500 | 99.97 | 100 |
Enterprise | 100 | 100 |
Not a whole lot to say here other than excellent. 100% uptime across the board except one monitor out of two showing 99.97%.
WebPageTest / WPPerformanceTester
Plan Tier | $25-50 | $51-100 | $200-$500 | Enterprise |
Dulles | 0.355 | 0.354 | 0.353 | 0.374 |
Denver | 1.57 | 1.493 | 1.236 | 1.322 |
LA | 0.797 | 0.804 | 0.804 | 0.712 |
London | 0.448 | 0.446 | 0.45 | 0.474 |
Frankfurt | 0.369 | 0.356 | 0.375 | 0.428 |
Rose Hill, Mauritius | 1.093 | 1.074 | 1.088 | 0.912 |
Singapore | 0.433 | 0.449 | 0.045 | 0.426 |
Mumbai | 0.692 | 0.64 | 0.662 | 0.522 |
Japan | 0.419 | 0.39 | 0.393 | 0.366 |
Sydney | 0.528 | 0.503 | 0.516 | 0.497 |
Brazil | 0.405 | 0.408 | 0.4 | 0.384 |
The WPT tests were pretty phenomenal, I rarely comment on these because it's rare a company stands out so much. Once you left the US, Pantheon was often the fastest amongst their peers. Their global coverage appears to be top notch out of the box.
Plan Tier | PHP Bench | WP Bench |
$25-50 | 9.914 | 163.2120124 |
$51-100 | 9.229 | 276.2430939 |
$200-$500 | 8.723 | 294.55081 |
Enterprise | 8.708 | 235.9046945 |
The WPPerformanceTester results were pretty consistent. Since it's supposed to be the same platform that scales up, the results looking similar seems to make sense. The slight improvement in PHP bench scores as you scale is nice, but without a lot of repeated testing, unclear if that's by design or just a happy coincidence.
Conclusion
Another year, another fabulous performance from Pantheon. Not only are they the highest rated company on Review Signal's reviews - they consistently earn top tier performance awards in our testing. They stepped up their game from last year and earned an extra Top Tier performance award and an honorable mention. Their global response times were maybe the most impressive feature. They earned fastest average response time in 3/4 tiers on Load Impact and 2/4 on Load Storm, along with often having the fastest response time in their price tiers on WebPageTest. Overall, it was a pretty impressive performance from Pantheon this year.
SiteGround Review (2018)
SiteGround participated for the fifth time in our WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks (2018). This review is based off the results of that test. Last year SiteGround competed in four price tiers and earned 3 Top Tier awards. This year SiteGround competed in the <$25, $25-50, and Enterprise tier.
SiteGround is one of the oldest competitors in our benchmarks and have for years now topped our reviews based on what people say on social media leading the shared category by a whopping 13% over the next highest competitor at the time of writing (Sep 2018).
The Products
Plan Name | Plan Monthly Price | Plan Visitors Allowed | Plan Disk Space | Plan Bandwidth |
Plan Sites Allowed
|
GrowBig | $14.95 | Suitable for ~ 25,000 Visits Monthly | 20GB | Unmetered | Unlimited |
GoGeek | $29.95 | Suitable for ~ 100,000 Visits Monthly | 30GB | Unmetered | Unlimited |
Enterprise | $4,800 | Unlimited | $1 per 1GB for distrbuted storage + shared file system | 10TB | Custom |
Enterprise was a custom setup: 8 servers - 2 load balancers, 4 application nodes (PHP workers) and two MySQL database servers. Every server had 16GB of RAM. The total RAM for the whole solution was 128GB RAM.
Performance Review
Load Storm
Total Requests | Total Errors | Peak RPS | Average RPS | Peak Response Time(ms) | Average Response Time (ms) | Total Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Throughput (MB/s) |
Average Throughput (MB/s)
|
|
<25 | 316,826 | 14 | 242.02 | 176.01 | 5,361 | 445 | 21.18 | 16.98 | 11.76 |
25-50 | 317,462 | 16 | 245.1 | 176.37 | 4,569 | 404 | 21.23 | 17.25 | 11.79 |
Enterprise | 1,443,091 | 15 | 1,151.40 | 801.72 | 15,086 | 209 | 105.15 | 84.68 | 58.42 |
Sources: <25, 25-50, Enterprise
The Load Storm test is designed to simulate real users coming to the site, logging in and browsing the site bursting some of the caching mechanisms typically found on managed WordPress hosts.
SiteGround aced the LoadStorm tests having minimal errors across every price tier. The enterprise configuration really shined here and makes it clear the value of all the redundancy and scalabliity where it had half the average response time and handled 1.43 million requests without issue.
Load Impact
Requests | Errors | Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Average Load Time (Seconds) | Peak Average Bandwidth (Mbps) |
Peak Average Requests/Sec
|
|
<25 | 318163 | 4 | 16.97 | 0.556 | 264 | 605 |
25-50 | 316927 | 0 | 16.89 | 0.531 | 280 | 642 |
Enterprise | 1627518 | 7 | 87.96 | 0.618 | 1370 | 3100 |
Sources: <25, 25-50, Enterprise
The Load Impact test makes sure static caching is effective so that if a page gets a lot of traffic the site will keep responding without issue.
SiteGround again aced the Load Impact tests. Nearly no errors on <25 and Enterprise and zero on the 25-50 test.
Uptime
UptimeRobot | StatusCake | |
<25 | 99.99 | 99.99 |
25-50 | 99 | 98.94 |
Enterprise | 99.96 | 100 |
The <25 and Enterprise didn't have any uptime issues. Unfortunately the 25-50 plan ran into some issues. SiteGround issued a statement about the issue:
"The recorded downtime for the SiteGround GoGeek hosting plan during the test was not a result of actual server availability issues. The uptime is below 99.9% because during performance testing an automatic limitation system temporarily kicked in, in a way that prevented the uptime test to be properly executed. SiteGround confirmed that this particular limitation system should not have been active on the tested accounts and is currently not active on any of their production servers."
WebPageTest / WPPerformanceTester
PHP Bench | WP Bench | |
<25 | 10.49 | 1157.407407 |
25-50 | 10.44 | 890.4719501 |
Enterprise | 10.457 | 196.6181675 |
The WPPerformanceTester results were average. The distributed nature of the Enterprise shows quite clearly how having redundant and scalable systems can reduce thoroughput on the WP Bench (MySQL) when you run multiple and separate database servers.
<25 | 25-50 | Enterprise | |
Dulles | 0.432 | 0.508 | 0.812 |
Denver | 1.489 | 1.358 | 1.342 |
LA | 0.909 | 0.894 | 1.06 |
London | 0.937 | 1.082 | 0.998 |
Frankfurt | 1.087 | 1.235 | 0.999 |
Rose Hill, Mauritius | 1.945 | 2.108 | 2.636 |
Singapore | 2.088 | 2.564 | 1.908 |
Mumbai | 1.957 | 2.329 | 2.109 |
Japan | 1.617 | 1.769 | 1.394 |
Sydney | 1.781 | 2.126 | 1.588 |
Brazil | 1.392 | 1.565 | 1.187 |
Nothing special to say here, it performed as expected.
Conclusion
SiteGround had excellent load testing performances. Load Storm and Load Impact results were great across the board. The <25 plan also had the second fewest errors cumulatively in its price tier. The 25-50 plan looked solid except there was an uptime issue which disqualified it from earning top tier status. SiteGround's Enterprise offering was a new entry in the tier. They made quite a splash with an 8 server configuration which handled our heaviest load tests without batting an eye. It's nice to see SiteGround offering great performance at an entry level price point and being able to scale that performance up to an Enterprise grade solution.
CloudWays Review (2018)
CloudWays participated for the fourth time in our WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks (2018). This review is based off the results of that test. This year CloudWays participated in the 25-50, 51-100 and 201-500 price tiers.
In years past it's been interesting to see CloudWays compete with the same stack on different platforms. This year is the furthest departure from that we've seen so far. It's also the first time CloudWays has earned Top Tier status for two out of three plans that competed this year. It's also important to note, the Digital Ocean plan was originally $70 when testing started but Digital Ocean reduced their pricing causing the cost of the plan to drop dramatically to $42 hence the competing in a different tier above (51-100).
The Products
Plan Monthly Price | Plan Visitors Allowed | Plan Memory/RAM | Plan Disk Space | Plan Bandwidth |
Plan Sites Allowed
|
|
Vultr 4GB New York | $44 | Unlimited | 4GB | 60GB SSD | 3 TB | Unlimited |
DigitalOcean 4GB | $42 | Unlimited | 4GB | 80gb | 4TB | unlimited |
AWS EC2 - 2XL - USA N.Virginia | $495.50 | Unlimited | 32GB | Starts from 4GB (variable) | 2GB | Unlimited |
Performance Review
Load Storm
Total Requests | Total Errors | Peak RPS | Average RPS | Peak Response Time(ms) | Average Response Time (ms) | Total Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Throughput (MB/s) | Average Throughput (MB/s) | |
CloudWays AWS | 770,304 | 822 | 607.12 | 427.95 | 15,083 | 324 | 52.27 | 42.27 | 29.04 |
CloudWays Vultr | 328,015 | 0 | 249.5 | 182.23 | 7,372 | 360 | 22.27 | 18.55 | 12.37 |
CloudWays DO | 442,424 | 243 | 331.95 | 245.79 | 15,097 | 1,131 | 30.11 | 21.79 | 16.73 |
The Load Storm test is designed to simulate real users coming to the site, logging in and browsing the site bursting some of the caching mechanisms typically found on managed WordPress hosts.
The Vultr plan had no issue, the AWS and DO had a few errors but around 0.1% which is negligible. The big issue was Digital Ocean's response time started to increase as the load increased which knocked it out of earning Top Tier status. AWS and Vultr did great overall. With the price change, I wonder if the smaller test would have been handled better though.
Load Impact
Requests | Errors | Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Average Load Time (Seconds) | Peak Average Bandwidth (Mbps) |
Peak Average Requests/Sec
|
|
CloudWays AWS | 1049669 | 0 | 57 | 0.36 | 908 | 1990 |
CloudWays Vultr | 335275 | 0 | 18.21 | 0.544 | 278 | 624 |
CloudWays DO | 457906 | 30 | 24.89 | 1.92 | 312 | 702 |
The Load Impact test makes sure static caching is effective so that if a page gets a lot of traffic the site will keep responding without issue.
AWS and Vultr handled it perfectly with zero errors. Digital Ocean had a miniscule 30 errors but an increased response time as the test went on. Great showing overall on the Load Impact test for AWS and Vultr.
Uptime
UptimeRobot | StatusCake | |
CloudWays AWS | 100 | 100 |
CloudWays Vultr | 100 | 100 |
CloudWays DO | 100 | 100 |
Perfect. Across the board, perfect uptime.
WebPageTest / WPPerformanceTester
PHP Bench | WP Bench | |
CloudWays AWS | 8.831 | 266.5955745 |
CloudWays Vultr | 9.616 | 346.1405331 |
CloudWays DO | 13.421 | 135.7036233 |
The WPPerformanceTester results are normal.
CloudWays AWS | CloudWays Vultr | CloudWays DO | |
Dulles | 0.312 | 0.33 | 0.328 |
Denver | 1.137 | 1.305 | 1.101 |
LA | 0.924 | 1.014 | 1.069 |
London | 0.763 | 0.725 | 0.718 |
Frankfurt | 0.816 | 0.785 | 0.819 |
Rose Hill, Mauritius | 1.867 | 2.497 | 1.86 |
Singapore | 2.281 | 2.163 | 2.25 |
Mumbai | 1.65 | 2.287 | 1.646 |
Japan | 1.578 | 1.613 | 1.573 |
Sydney | 1.837 | 1.978 | 2.068 |
Brazil | 1.1 | 1.195 | 1.172 |
The WPT tests look good. The Dulles test scores were some of the fastest, especially the CloudWays AWS server which was located in the same testing data center.
Conclusion
Hard work does pay off. CloudWays has been participating for years and continually has been improving. Two Top Tier awards for AWS and Vultr plans. The Digital Ocean plan unfortunately didn't share the same honor but it seems it was competing above its weight with a price drop that would have put it one cost tier below now.