Netgrid Host vs Tihost
Real-test comparison — higher score is better on every metric (0–100).
Miami
Frankfurt
| Netgrid Host | Metric | Tihost |
|---|---|---|
|
53.5
|
Overall |
55.6
|
|
100.0
|
Ping |
63.8
|
|
36.0
|
Network speed |
26.1
|
|
13.0
|
CPU |
83.2
|
|
33.4
|
Memory |
92.1
|
|
72.9
|
Disk |
33.7
|
| 1 vCPU · 1 GB RAM | Configuration | 4 vCPU · 4 GB RAM |
On the overall score Netgrid Host and Tihost are level: 53.5 vs 55.6 out of 100. A gap of 2.1 points is smaller than the spread between individual passes, so calling an outright winner would be dishonest — look at the individual categories below.
Netgrid Host is stronger on ping, network speed and disk; Tihost — on CPU and memory.
What that means in practice: for a game server, VPN and anything latency-sensitive, Netgrid Host is the closer fit; for a database and write-heavy work — Netgrid Host; for file delivery, streaming and backups — Netgrid Host; for builds, encryption and compute-bound tasks — Tihost.
Where the numbers come from: the best published test of Netgrid Host was taken in United States on the 1 vCPU · 1 GB RAM plan, Tihost — in Germany on the 4 vCPU · 4 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.