GitHub|Since 2007

ruHoster.ruvsInfoboxru

Head-to-head hosting performance comparison based on real test data

Test Date: 2/25/2026

WPTR Score1903 ms
Rank#530
TTFB562ms
Time to 1MB531ms
Score1903
LCP962ms
FCP762ms
WPTR ScoreWinner1049 ms
Rank#279
TTFB640ms
Time to 1MB142ms
Score1049
LCP1040ms
FCP840ms

Our Verdict

Hoster.ru wins with 562ms TTFB (vs Infobox's 640ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseHoster.ruInfoboxWinner
DNS Lookup86ms318msHoster.ru
TCP Connection169ms150msInfobox
TLS Handshake173ms89msInfobox
Server Processing201ms151msInfobox
Total TTFB629ms708msHoster.ru

Technology & Security Features

Hoster.ru

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size682.8 KB

Infobox

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size106.2 KB
0/3
Hoster.ru Security Features
0/3
Infobox Security Features

TTFB Comparison Over Time

Understanding the Metrics

WPTR Score: Wptr Lab Real-Load Score: (Time to 1MB x 2.4) + TTFB. Raw server & network performance (Lower is better).
TTFB: Time to First Byte - How fast the server responds
Time to 1MB: Time to 1MB - Time taken to download 1MB of data (lower is better)
LCP: Largest Contentful Paint - When main content loads
FCP: First Contentful Paint - When first content appears
Score: Overall performance score (0-100)

A Note on Hosting Selection

While TTFB and performance metrics are important indicators, choosing the right hosting provider involves many other factors: security measures, customer support quality, uptime guarantees, scalability options, and pricing structure. Academic research emphasizes that a balanced approach considering all these aspects leads to better long-term outcomes.

Chizhov, A., & Fesenko, A. (2025). Web hosting companies' client solutions: A study of a strategic standpoint. Corporate & Business Strategy Review. doi.org/10.22495/cbsrv6i1art14

Data in this comparison is obtained through independent tests using our TTFB Checker tool.