GitHub|Since 2007

DEInterNetXvsMc-Host24DE

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

Test Date: 2/24/2026

WPTR Score4649 ms
Rank#779
TTFB248ms
Time to 1MB1744ms
Score4649
LCP648ms
FCP448ms
WPTR ScoreWinner473 ms
Rank#46
TTFB126ms
Time to 1MB112ms
Score473
LCP526ms
FCP326ms

Our Verdict

Mc-Host24 wins with 126ms TTFB (vs InterNetX's 248ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseInterNetXMc-Host24Winner
DNS Lookup211ms6msMc-Host24
TCP Connection5ms14msInterNetX
TLS Handshake10ms23msInterNetX
Server Processing237ms161msMc-Host24
Total TTFB463ms204msMc-Host24

Technology & Security Features

InterNetX

Server/CDNcloudflare
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size91.9 KB

Mc-Host24

Server/CDNcloudflare
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Enabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size173.6 KB
1/3
InterNetX Security Features
2/3
Mc-Host24 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.