Best VPS by CPU
Providers ranked by measured CPU performance — single and multi-core compute, encryption and compression.
| # | Provider | Score | Relative | Tests |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
83.2 |
|
1 test |
| 2 |
|
82.7 |
|
1 test |
| 3 |
|
80.3 |
|
5 tests |
| 4 |
|
67.0 |
|
1 test |
| 5 |
|
64.1 |
|
10 tests |
| 6 | T Timeweb | 39.6 |
|
2 tests |
| 7 |
|
38.5 |
|
7 tests |
| 8 |
|
29.6 |
|
1 test |
| 9 |
|
29.6 |
|
2 tests |
| 10 |
|
27.9 |
|
1 test |
| 11 |
|
24.2 |
|
13 tests |
| 12 |
|
18.7 |
|
3 tests |
| 13 |
|
14.6 |
|
1 test |
VPS CPU: why a single number is not enough
We measure the CPU three different ways: sysbench single-threaded and across all threads, AES-256-GCM encryption, and gzip compression. One number is not enough — a server can be fast on one thread and collapse on many if it has fewer real cores than promised.
Every server goes through the same set of tests with the same agent. Key tests run three times, the median counts, and the spread across attempts is published separately — it says as much about stability as raw speed does.
The selection holds 13 hosts, led by Ghostnet at 83.2. The gap between first and last is 68.6 points. That is a lot: the choice here genuinely matters rather than being a matter of taste.
A score is 0–100 within a comparable group, not an absolute value. It is computed half as a position among others and half against a reference «poor → excellent» scale, so the only slow server in a small sample does not get an undeserved zero.
Best VPS for a task
See the methodology for how scores are computed (version 2026.07b).