Tihost vs Waicore
Real-test comparison — higher score is better on every metric (0–100).
Frankfurt
Frankfurt
| Tihost | Metric | Waicore |
|---|---|---|
|
55.6
|
Overall |
67.9
|
|
63.8
|
Ping |
74.1
|
|
26.3
|
Network speed |
62.9
|
|
82.7
|
CPU |
67.0
|
|
92.1
|
Memory |
87.1
|
|
33.7
|
Disk |
59.0
|
| 4 vCPU · 4 GB RAM | Configuration | 1 vCPU · 2 GB RAM |
On the overall score Waicore is ahead: 67.9 vs 55.6 out of 100 — a gap of 12.4 points. But the overall score blends five categories with different weights, and your workload may only care about one of them.
Tihost is stronger on CPU and memory; Waicore — on ping, network speed and disk.
What that means in practice: for a game server, VPN and anything latency-sensitive, Waicore is the closer fit; for a database and write-heavy work — Waicore; for file delivery, streaming and backups — Waicore; for builds, encryption and compute-bound tasks — Tihost.
Where the numbers come from: the best published test of Tihost was taken in Germany on the 4 vCPU · 4 GB RAM plan, Waicore — in Germany on the 1 vCPU · 2 GB RAM plan. The locations match, so the network scores are directly comparable.
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.