While there are many comparison articles for WordPress, the real deciding factors go beyond just whether a VPS is fast. The optimal solution varies significantly depending on whether a shared server is sufficient, whether you’re ready to install KUSANAGI to further optimize performance, and how much you’re willing to handle yourself—including email and backups.
In this article, we’ll focus specifically on WordPress operations, comparing providers based on pricing and features from their official websites as of March 30, 2026, along with our own test results: a 7-day measurement with caching disabled (57 tests every 3 hours) and a 1-day measurement with caching enabled (9 tests every 3 hours). We’ll examine these options not for gaming or Windows use, but specifically for blogs, owned media, corporate websites, and managing multiple sites.
- You can compare shared servers and VPS from the perspective of practical WordPress operations.
- You’ll learn which services—such as Lolipop, Shin VPS, and KAGOYA CLOUD VPS—are best suited for your needs.
- By focusing on the results of 57 measurements taken over 7 days with caching disabled, you can assess the underlying performance without caching.
- You’ll gain the criteria to determine when a shared server is sufficient and when it’s time to switch to a VPS.
- You’ll also be able to distinguish between Shin Rental Server and Shin VPS.
Conclusion First
To put it simply, if you just want to run WordPress safely, choosing a fast shared server is the safer bet. On the other hand, if you plan to manage multiple sites, use KUSANAGI, automate processes, or rely on SSH, the value of a VPS becomes clear. In this round of real-world testing, the top choice for shared servers was Lolipop, and for VPS, it was Shin VPS.
| Purpose | Top Choice | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| First-time WordPress users with 1–2 sites | Lolipop High Speed Trial | Because the admin panel is easy to use, and with WP eval at 0.313 seconds and REST API at 0.003 seconds, it ranked highest among shared hosting plans. |
| Serious Speed Optimization with KUSANAGI | Shin VPS 2GB High-Capacity Memory Plan | It ranked first overall with an external TTFB of 0.103 seconds, an internal TTFB of 0.047 seconds, and an AB score of 53.1 rps. |
| A configuration with heavy CPU, DB, and disk load | KAGOYA CLOUD VPS 2GB | Because it has strong DB and disk performance, making it easy to run processes other than WordPress. |
| Ease of KUSANAGI installation | ConoHa VPS 2GB | It comes with the official KUSANAGI Manager, making it easy to get started with the setup. |
If you’re still undecided, the most reasonable approach is to start by launching on a shared server and switch to a VPS once the limitations become clear. While VPS is certainly powerful, skipping the option of a fast shared server and choosing VPS from the start can sometimes result in operational burdens taking precedence over flexibility.
Comparison Premises
The comparison in this article is not merely a listing of specs. While focusing primarily on non-cached performance when WordPress is actually deployed, we also consider ease of management, support, the ease of setting up KUSANAGI, and pricing. Pricing is based on official listings as of March 30, 2026, but may vary depending on contract term, promotions, and region, so please check the latest page before signing up.
- The primary basis for performance evaluation is the average of a 7-day measurement (every 3 hours, 57 times) with caching disabled.
- The average of a 1-day measurement with caching enabled (9 tests every 3 hours) serves as a supplementary metric to gauge improvements in the delivery layer.
- VPS performance is measured using a KUSANAGI configuration.
- Shared servers are evaluated based on each provider’s standard management features.
| Comparison Criteria | Shared Server | VPS |
|---|---|---|
| Initial Setup | Easy to understand with a focus on the management interface | Requires configuration of the OS, web server, database, and permissions |
| Often provided as an add-on service | Tends to be designed as a separate service | |
| KUSANAGI | Cannot be implemented | Significant benefits |
| App, cron, and Git operations | Many restrictions | Easy to integrate flexibly |
| Ease of managing multiple sites | Prone to plan-related constraints | Easy to consolidate onto a single server |
| Scope of responsibility during outages | Small | Large |
A strong contender for shared hosting
If you’re specifically considering WordPress, shared hosting isn’t necessarily a step down. Even based on these figures, Lolipop outperformed some VPS providers in WordPress app processing and was more than capable of handling standard blogs and corporate websites. Here, we’ll outline the three providers that are realistic candidates for WordPress use.
Lolipop High Speed
Lolipop High Speed is the top contender among shared hosting providers.The official price for the High Speed plan starts at 660 yen per month, with 700GB of storage. In our recent tests, the results were: external TTFB 0.162 seconds, internal TTFB 0.094 seconds, WP eval 0.313 seconds, and REST API 0.003 seconds. The speed of WordPress PHP processing and REST API performance stood out in particular, and these numbers translate to a noticeable improvement in the user experience when updating posts or navigating the admin panel.
This is the most highly recommended option for those who say, “I don’t need a VPS, but I can’t stand slow shared hosting either.” Lolipop’s control panel is easy to understand, making it ideal for personal blogs, early-stage owned media, and small-scale client sites where you want to focus solely on running WordPress.
ConoHa WING Basic
ConoHa WING Basic starts at 1,210 yen per month and offers 300GB of storage. While its PageSpeed and LCP metrics look good, our actual measurements showed an external TTFB of 0.168 seconds, an internal TTFB of 0.221 seconds, a WP eval of 0.508 seconds, and a REST API of 0.142 seconds.The front-end performance isn’t bad, but non-cached API and application-layer processing are slower than on Lolipop.
It’s a viable option for those who want to use the ConoHa ecosystem or prefer its admin interface. However, for sites that frequently interact with the WordPress admin panel or APIs, the performance gap tends to be quite noticeable.
Xserver Standard
Xserver Standard starts at 990 yen per month and offers 500GB of storage. While its strong support and track record remain key strengths, our recent tests showed an external TTFB of 0.185 seconds, an internal TTFB of 0.510 seconds, and a WP eval of 1.738 seconds—results that clearly highlight the sluggishness of the application layer.
Nevertheless, if you prioritize the wealth of information, support channels, and familiar operational procedures, it remains a viable option. If your current setup is already stable and speed isn’t a bottleneck, there’s no need to switch unnecessarily. However, if you’re choosing a new provider specifically to improve speed, Lolipop is the clearer choice at this point.
Note that we’ve included Simfree Server in this comparison for reference. The paid plan is likely superior when you factor in the hassle of manual updates and overall performance. I think it’s quite usable for testing and staging purposes.
Top VPS Candidates
It’s easy to assume that “all VPS plans are pretty much the same if they all offer 2GB,” but the numbers in this comparison clearly show a difference. In particular, when you look at not just external TTFB but also internal TTFB, AB, Siege, and Disk I/O together, the differences in performance become quite apparent. Assuming you’re running WordPress with KUSANAGI, the five providers to actually compare are as follows.
Shin VPS 2GB
Shin VPS 2GB took first place overall in this roundup. Officially, high-capacity memory plans in the 2GB range are available starting in the 690 yen range, and KUSANAGI app images can also be used.In actual testing, the results were: External TTFB 0.103 seconds, Internal TTFB 0.047 seconds, AB 53.1 rps, and Siege 511.1 tx/s. Since it excels in both uncached WordPress responses and HTTP performance, it is the top choice if you’re switching to a VPS for speed.
Even in daily aggregates with caching enabled, external TTFB drops to 0.063 seconds and internal TTFB to 0.009 seconds, demonstrating strong performance in content delivery. It’s ideal for those who want to consolidate multiple WordPress sites, accelerate performance with Cloudflare, or use WP-CLI and cron regularly.
KAGOYA CLOUD VPS 2GB
KAGOYA CLOUD VPS 2GB comes in second place, but it’s not just a close second—it excels in a different area. The official price starts at 770 yen for 2GB, and it includes the KUSANAGI template optimized for WordPress. In actual testing, it recorded an external TTFB of 0.158 seconds, an internal TTFB of 0.062 seconds, 38.8 rps on AB, and 362.2 tx/s on Siege.It also boasts the strongest disk I/O, and is quite excellent in terms of the balance between CPU, DB, and disk performance.
KAGOYA’s stability is particularly appealing if you plan to run not only WordPress but also jobs, APIs, image processing, and backups on the same server. It’s well-suited for users who want a solid, reliable setup that can handle heavy workloads, rather than just chasing the absolute fastest performance.
XServer VPS 2GB
XServer VPS 2GB starts at around 792 yen for 2GB and includes a KUSANAGI app image. In actual testing, external TTFB was 0.130 seconds, internal TTFB was 0.058 seconds, AB was 36.3 rps, and Siege was 120.4 tx/s.While it doesn’t quite match the raw performance of Shin VPS, its internal TTFB is quite excellent, and overall performance is solid.
Since there are free plans for both the 2GB and 4GB options, it’s easy to try them out first before deciding on a full subscription. This is an obvious choice for those who have used Xserver-type services in the past and want to upgrade to a VPS with a similar user experience.
ConoHa VPS
ConoHa VPS starts at around 1,144 yen for the 2GB plan, and a major feature is the ability to use the official KUSANAGI Manager. In actual measurements, the external TTFB was 0.157 seconds, the internal TTFB was 0.077 seconds, AB was 48.6 rps, and Siege was 136.0 tx/s.While it performs well in AB tests, it struggles to scale in Siege tests, showing a disparity between its strength in single HTTP requests and its ability to handle sustained load.
It’s quite user-friendly for those who want to get KUSANAGI up and running quickly or prioritize the ease of navigation within the management interface. It’s easy to categorize: if speed is your top priority, go with Shin VPS; if you’re looking at heavy processing, choose KAGOYA; and if ease of setup is key, go with ConoHa VPS.
Sakura VPS 2GB
Sakura VPS offers a 2GB plan in the Ishikari region starting at 1,738 yen, and KUSANAGI 9 is available as a standard OS.In actual testing, it recorded an external TTFB of 0.155 seconds, an internal TTFB of 0.108 seconds, 35.0 rps on AB, and 370.4 tx/s on Siege. While it performs well on Siege, its PHP performance and TTFB fall short, giving the impression that it’s a candidate for specific use cases only.
It’s worth considering if you’re already familiar with Sakura’s interface, want to try it out with a free trial, or prioritize operational convenience over streaming performance. However, if you’re looking for the top choice for WordPress optimization, Shin VPS or KAGOYA are currently easier to recommend.
Choosing Between Shin Rental Server and Shin VPS
Deciding between Shin Rental Server and Shin VPS is a common point of confusion when comparing options. The answer is simple: if you just want to run WordPress lightly and securely, go with Shin Rental Server; if you want to include KUSANAGI, automation, or managing multiple sites, go with Shin VPS.
| Category | Shin Rental Server Basic Trial | Shin VPS 2GB High-Capacity Memory Plan |
|---|---|---|
| Estimated Monthly Cost | From 1,078 yen | Starting in the 690 yen range |
| Setup | User-friendly, control panel-based | Manage everything yourself, from the OS to the middleware |
| Often provided as an add-on service | Tends to be designed as a separate service | |
| KUSANAGI | Cannot be implemented | App image available |
| Flexibility | Low to medium | High |
| Ideal for | Want to manage WordPress with minimal effort | Want to handle multiple sites, automation, and performance optimization |
If you want to manage everything from email and SSL to backups in one place, shared hosting like Shin Rental Server remains a strong choice. On the other hand, if you plan to work with Git deployments, WP-CLI, cron, Redis, Node.js builds, and custom Nginx configurations, Shin VPS is the better option.
Comparison of Actual Benchmark Results
Below are the actual measurement results that form the basis of this article. The primary focus is on a 7-day aggregate with caching disabled; the caching-enabled results serve as supplementary data to observe performance improvements. Since this is an article focused on WordPress, we prioritize metrics such as external TTFB, internal TTFB, WP eval, and REST API, rather than just disk performance or A/B testing.
Testing Conditions
- For the cache-off scenario, measurements were taken every 3 hours for 7 days from March 17, 2026, to March 24, 2026, for a total of 57 measurements.
- For cache-on, measurements were taken every 3 hours for one day, from March 24, 2026, to March 25, 2026, for a total of 9 measurements.
- The primary basis for the decision is the cache-off scenario. The cache-on scenario is used to verify the extent of performance improvements.
- VPS comparisons were conducted in a KUSANAGI environment.
Comparison of 10 services with Cache Off
The meanings of each metric are as follows: External TTFB, Internal TTFB, WP eval, and REST API are more favorable when shorter, while AB and Siege are more favorable when higher. Disk I/O is viewed as an indicator of disk performance.
- External TTFB: This is the initial response time as seen from the actual visitor’s perspective. It is a metric that closely reflects the user experience, including network and delivery paths.
- Internal TTFB: This is the first response time as seen from within the server. It is a metric that clearly shows the underlying performance of the server and application.
- WP eval: This is the PHP processing time for WordPress. It provides a clear indication of the load on the admin panel and non-cached processes.
- REST API: This is the response time for WordPress’s REST API. It relates to the responsiveness of the admin panel and external integrations.
- AB: HTTP processing performance measured using ApacheBench. This makes it easy to see the performance of single requests.
- Siege: The processing capacity under sustained HTTP load. This makes it easy to assess resilience during concurrent access.
- Disk I/O: An indicator of storage read/write performance. This affects the capacity for database operations, backups, and image processing.
| Service | Category | External TTFB: The time to first response as seen by actual visitors. Shorter is better. | Internal TTFB: The time to first response as seen from within the server. Shorter is better. | WP eval ? This is the PHP processing time for WordPress. Shorter is better. | REST API ? This is the response time of the WordPress REST API. Shorter is better. | Impressions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shin VPS 2GB High-Capacity Memory Plan | VPS | 0.103 seconds | 0.047 seconds | 0.619 seconds | 0.029 seconds | Overall 1st Place |
| KAGOYA CLOUD VPS 2GB | VPS | 0.158 seconds | 0.062 seconds | 0.812 seconds | 0.037 seconds | Strong database and disk performance |
| XServer VPS 2GB Free Plan | VPS | 0.130 seconds | 0.058 seconds | 0.817 seconds | 0.036 seconds | Solid mid-to-high range |
| ConoHa VPS 2GB | VPS | 0.157 seconds | 0.077 seconds | 0.944 seconds | 0.047 seconds | HTTP-heavy |
| Sakura VPS 2GB Trial | VPS | 0.155 seconds | 0.108 seconds | 1.133 seconds | 0.066 seconds | Limited Use |
| Lollipop High Speed Trial | Shared | 0.162 seconds | 0.094 seconds | 0.313 seconds | 0.003 seconds | Shared 1st Place |
| ConoHa WING Basic | Shared | 0.168 seconds | 0.221 seconds | 0.508 seconds | 0.142 seconds | REST is slow |
| Xserver Standard Trial | Shared | 0.185 seconds | 0.510 seconds | 1.738 seconds | 0.025 seconds | Heavy application layer |
| Synfree Server | Shared | 0.238 seconds | 0.288 seconds | 1.026 seconds | 0.028 seconds | Reference values for the free plan |
| Sakura Rental Server Standard Trial | Shared | 0.367 seconds | 0.236 seconds | 1.325 seconds | 0.018 seconds | External TTFB is poor |
Looking at this table, you can see that VPS offers much more stable internal TTFB, while shared servers show significant variation depending on the provider. Lolipop, in particular, performs quite well for a shared server, with WP eval at 0.313 seconds and REST API at 0.003 seconds. In other words, there are definitely cases where a fast shared server is sufficient if you’re only running WordPress.
Speed Variability and Initial Slowness
Looking at the 57 long-term measurements, the top-performing VPS providers remained relatively stable even across different times of day.For example, Shin VPS had an external TTFB of 0.096–0.131 seconds and an internal TTFB of 0.042–0.053 seconds, while KAGOYA CLOUD VPS had an external TTFB of 0.147–0.180 seconds and an internal TTFB of 0.053–0.075 seconds.Even among shared hosting providers, Lolipop was quite stable at 0.153–0.173 seconds for external TTFB and 0.089–0.108 seconds for internal TTFB, but Xserver’s shared hosting showed a wider range: 0.137–0.546 seconds for external TTFB,and 0.124–0.876 seconds internally, while Synfree’s external latency ranged from 0.136 to 0.566 seconds and internal latency from 0.083 to 0.826 seconds. Rather than the shared hosting services being generally unstable, it is more accurate to say that there are significant differences between services, with higher-tier VPS services tending to be more stable.
In the five consecutive measurements, we observed a tendency for the first measurement to be slow, with performance stabilizing from the second to the fifth measurement.While there is some slight warm-up even with VPS, the differences are quite significant in some shared hosting plans. In particular, for the Shin Rental Server, the external TTFB was 0.675 seconds for the first test, compared to an average of 0.160 seconds for tests 2–5, while the internal TTFB was 2.025 seconds for the first test, compared to an average of 0.233 seconds for tests 2–5.ConoHa WING also showed a clear difference in the first request: external TTFB went from 0.638 seconds to 0.178 seconds, and internal TTFB from 0.708 seconds to 0.260 seconds.It appears that some shared hosting services experience a first-request delay similar to a cold start. On the other hand, XServer VPS saw external response times of 0.133 seconds → 0.127 seconds and internal response times of 0.070 seconds → 0.061 seconds. Similarly, while there was a difference in internal response times for the thin VPS (0.173 seconds → 0.052 seconds), the absolute values remained at a low level.
VPS HTTP Notes
| Service | AB: HTTP processing performance measured using ApacheBench. Higher values are better. | Siege ? This measures the throughput under continuous HTTP load. Higher values are better. | Disk I/O ? An indicator of storage read/write performance. Higher values are better. | Overview |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Syn VPS 2GB High-Capacity Memory Plan | 53.1 rps | 511.1 tx/s | High | Strong performance for both WordPress and HTTP-based applications |
| KAGOYA CLOUD VPS 2GB | 38.8 rps | 362.2 transactions per second | Best | Good balance of CPU, DB, and disk |
| XServer VPS 2GB Free Plan | 36.3 rps | 120.4 transactions per second | On the low side | Good TTFB but moderate load performance |
| ConoHa VPS 2GB | 48.6 rps | 136.0 tx/s | Low | AB is strong, but sustained load is difficult to increase |
| Sakura VPS 2GB Trial | 35.0 rps | 370.4 tx/s | Medium | Siege is strong, but PHP is weak |
What’s interesting here is that while KAGOYA ranks second overall for WordPress alone, it performs quite strongly when CPU, DB, and disk performance are factored in. If you plan to run applications other than WordPress alongside it, your choice will likely narrow down to either ShinVPS or KAGOYA.
Performance with Caching Enabled
In the daily aggregate data with caching enabled, TTFB and HTTP-related metrics improved significantly for almost all services. On the other hand, the ranking difference for WP eval remained largely unchanged. In other words, even if delivery speeds up, it cannot hide the underlying performance of the admin panel or non-cached pages.
| Service | External TTFB: The initial response time as seen by actual visitors. Shorter is better. | Internal TTFB ? The initial response time as seen from within the server. Shorter is better. | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shin VPS 2GB High-Memory Plan | 0.103 seconds -> 0.063 seconds | 0.047 seconds -> 0.009 seconds | Showed the greatest improvement in delivery performance |
| KAGOYA CLOUD VPS 2GB | 0.158 seconds -> 0.103 seconds | 0.062 seconds -> 0.012 seconds | Still performs very well even after caching |
| XServer VPS 2GB Free Plan | 0.130 seconds -> 0.072 seconds | 0.058 seconds -> 0.011 seconds | Internal TTFB has improved significantly |
| Lolipop High Speed Trial | 0.162 seconds -> 0.081 seconds | 0.094 seconds -> 0.016 seconds | Even on a shared plan, performance is quite strong |
| ConoHa WING Basic | 0.168 seconds -> 0.076 seconds | 0.221 seconds -> 0.158 seconds | External performance improves, but internal differences remain |
For this reason, when deciding whether to implement it, it’s safer not to assume that “it’ll be fast once caching is enabled, so it’s fine.” The areas where WordPress really shows a difference are non-cached operations like article editing, REST, search, post-login actions, and batch processing.
Reference values from 5 consecutive measurements
I’ve also included reference values from five consecutive measurements taken with caching disabled after the configuration changes. Although the sample size is smaller than the long-term comparison taken every three hours, it’s useful for understanding the relative performance of each service—including shared hosting—and for confirming the initial slowness.
| Service | Category | External TTFB ? The initial response time as seen by actual visitors. Shorter is better. | Internal TTFB ? The first response time as seen from within the server. Shorter is better. | WP eval ? WordPress PHP processing time. Shorter is better. | REST API ? This is the response time for WordPress’s REST API. Shorter is better. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Syn VPS 2GB High-Capacity Memory Plan | VPS | 0.107 seconds | 0.053 seconds | 0.635 seconds | 0.030 seconds |
| KAGOYA CLOUD VPS 2GB | VPS | 0.162 seconds | 0.067 seconds | 0.818 seconds | 0.037 seconds |
| XServer VPS 2GB Free Plan | VPS | 0.132 seconds | 0.062 seconds | 0.789 seconds | 0.038 seconds |
| ConoHa VPS 2GB | VPS | 0.186 seconds | 0.088 seconds | 1.006 seconds | 0.051 seconds |
| Sakura VPS 2GB Trial | VPS | 0.160 seconds | 0.112 seconds | 1.101 seconds | 0.062 seconds |
| Lolipop High Speed Trial | Shared | 0.164 seconds | 0.096 seconds | 0.312 seconds | 0.003 seconds |
| ConoHa WING Basic | Shared | 0.172 seconds | 0.225 seconds | 0.506 seconds | 0.142 seconds |
| Shared Server Basic Trial | Shared | 0.166 seconds | 0.170 seconds | 0.894 seconds | 0.026 seconds |
| Xserver Standard Trial | Shared | 0.151 seconds | 0.618 seconds | 1.640 seconds | 0.013 seconds |
| Sakura Rental Server Standard Trial | Shared | 0.309 seconds | 0.225 seconds | 1.271 seconds | 0.018 seconds |
| Synfree Server | Shared | 0.157 seconds | 0.338 seconds | 1.125 seconds | 0.040 seconds |
Even in these five consecutive measurements, Shin Rental Server isn’t extremely poor. However, the overall picture remains unchanged: Lolipop is superior in terms of WordPress processing speed, while Shin VPS is superior in terms of flexibility and internal response times. To put it simply, Shin Rental Server falls in the middle range of shared hosting, Lolipop is the top choice for shared hosting, and Shin VPS is the top choice for VPS.
When a shared server is sufficient
- You primarily operate 1–2 WordPress sites
- You want to entrust email, SSL, and backups to a single provider
- You don’t need SSH or root access
- Page load speeds are sufficient with caching and a CDN
- Server management is not your core business
Under these conditions, the high level of reliability offered by a fast shared server becomes a clear advantage. Especially if your main tasks involve content creation, sales, and client support, relying on a shared server to minimize issues is ultimately more effective than managing server operations yourself.
If switching to a VPS
- You want to use WP-CLI, Git deployment, cron, and log monitoring as standard
- You want to customize KUSANAGI, Redis, and your own Nginx settings
- You want to consolidate multiple sites or APIs onto a single server
- Your admin panel or non-cached pages tend to become slow
- Shared server limitations are hindering feature additions
Once you reach this stage, the flexibility of a VPS becomes your greatest asset. Especially if you want to optimize your entire WordPress setup—including KUSANAGI and Cloudflare—there will be more and more aspects that a shared server simply can’t handle.
Common Concerns
Choosing Your First Server as a Beginner
For your first server, a fast shared hosting plan like Lolipop High Speed is sufficient. You should only choose a VPS from the start if you have clear goals from the beginning, such as learning Linux, consolidating multiple sites, using KUSANAGI, or implementing automation.
WordPress-Only Operations
If you’re running only WordPress, a VPS isn’t strictly necessary. In our recent performance tests, Lolipop performed quite well on many non-caching metrics. Unless you have specific requirements like membership sites, heavy search usage, or large-scale batch processing, it’s reasonable to conclude that a shared server is sufficient.
Implementing KUSANAGI
KUSANAGI is a strong choice when you’re serious about optimizing WordPress performance. However, for beginners running just a single site, it increases the burden of setup and maintenance. KUSANAGI is most effective when you’re ready to tackle comprehensive optimization—including non-cached processing, multiple sites, ongoing operations, and integration with Cloudflare.
Timing for Migration
The right time to consider migrating to a VPS isn’t simply because “VPS seems to be a better option.” It’s when constraints—such as a sluggish admin panel, the risk of manual deployments, the inability to install necessary tools, or the difficulty of managing multiple sites—begin to hinder your actual work. The actual migration process is outlined in “Complete Guide to WordPress Server Migration.”
Summary
When comparing servers for WordPress, a VPS isn’t always the right answer. Based on our recent performance tests, the shared server Lolipop proved to be sufficiently robust, while among VPS options, Shin VPS ranked first overall, and KAGOYA CLOUD VPS stood out in a separate category.
- If you just want to run WordPress with minimal hassle, a fast shared server is a strong option.
- However, if you’re considering KUSANAGI, automation, or managing multiple sites, the value of a VPS increases significantly.
- It’s safer to base your decision primarily on performance without caching, and view caching performance as a secondary factor.
- It’s easier to choose between Shin Rental Server and Shin VPS by focusing on their different roles rather than speed.
If you’re still unsure whether a shared server is sufficient, I recommend also checking out our upcoming guide, “How to Choose a Server for Beginners,” which will help clarify things. If you want to understand the differences between VPS options first, read “What Is a VPS? A Complete Guide to the Differences from Shared Hosting.” If you want to delve into speed optimization, read “WordPress Speed Optimization: The Fastest Configuration Achieved with KUSANAGI and Cloudflare.”
Comment