ITLDC vs Netgrid Host
Real-test comparison — higher score is better on every metric (0–100).
Amsterdam
Miami
| ITLDC | Metric | Netgrid Host |
|---|---|---|
|
64.3
|
Overall |
53.1
|
|
89.9
|
Ping |
100.0
|
|
84.9
|
Network speed |
36.2
|
|
18.7
|
CPU |
12.9
|
|
40.6
|
Memory |
32.9
|
|
72.5
|
Disk |
71.3
|
| 1 vCPU · 1 GB RAM | Configuration | 1 vCPU · 1 GB RAM |
On the overall score ITLDC is ahead: 64.3 vs 53.1 out of 100 — a gap of 11.2 points. But the overall score blends five categories with different weights, and your workload may only care about one of them.
ITLDC is stronger on network speed, CPU and memory; Netgrid Host — on ping. On disk the difference is within noise — treat them as equal there.
What that means in practice: for a game server, VPN and anything latency-sensitive, Netgrid Host is the closer fit; for file delivery, streaming and backups — ITLDC; for builds, encryption and compute-bound tasks — ITLDC.
Where the numbers come from: the best published test of ITLDC was taken in Netherlands on the 1 vCPU · 1 GB RAM plan, Netgrid Host — in United States on the 1 vCPU · 1 GB RAM plan. The locations differ, so compare ping and speed with care: they say as much about the route to our control endpoints as about the server itself.
Important: this compares the best published test of each provider, not an average across all their servers. Every result is a snapshot of one machine on the test date — on another node, or a month later, the numbers may differ. The scoring method and raw logs are public, so you can check them yourself.