What this page is for
This page is designed as a benchmark framework you can update with your own measurements, screenshots, and notes over time.
Benchmark framework
How to benchmark image CDN services the right way.
This page is built to become a linkable benchmark article: compare delivery speed, operational complexity, and platform fit using a repeatable testing method.
What users care about
Most people choosing an image delivery stack care about speed, setup complexity, cost predictability, and how much control they keep.
How to compare CDN services fairly
Benchmark pages work best when they compare identical files, identical cache states, and identical test locations. The goal is not to crown a winner forever. The goal is to show what each platform is optimized to do.
Suggested test setup
- Use the same image set across all providers.
- Test cold cache and warm cache separately.
- Measure from at least three regions.
- Record TTFB, total bytes, and full image load time.
- Repeat the run enough times to smooth out noise.
Comparison framework
| Provider | Strengths | Tradeoffs | Best fit |
|---|---|---|---|
| 124 South Main CDN | Simple delivery, lightweight pages, clear focus on image performance | Smaller ecosystem than major enterprise platforms | Small sites and owners who want direct control |
| Cloudflare | Large network, broad edge tooling, many adjacent services | Can feel bigger and more layered than some sites need | Teams wanting one vendor for many web functions |
| Bunny.net | Straightforward pricing and strong developer appeal | Feature choices vary by product mix | Developers who want a modern CDN stack |
| Amazon CloudFront | Deep AWS integration and large-scale flexibility | More operational complexity for smaller projects | AWS-heavy environments |
Sample scoring categories
Use a 1–5 score or a red-yellow-green system to keep the page easy to scan.
| Category | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| TTFB consistency | Shows how reliable first-byte delivery feels to visitors. |
| Image throughput | Highlights how quickly larger visual assets finish loading. |
| Setup complexity | Useful for small teams and solo operators. |
| Cache control flexibility | Important when you want aggressive caching without stale assets. |
| Total cost clarity | Prevents surprises after traffic grows. |
Suggested tools
WebPageTest
Lighthouse
Chrome DevTools network waterfalls
curl timing scripts
Real-user analytics and server logsEditorial angle for this page
Do not try to sound perfectly neutral. Sound transparent. Explain which type of website each provider suits best and show the evidence behind that conclusion. That gives the page credibility and keeps it useful even when raw numbers move over time.
Use this as a living benchmark.
Add screenshots, measured timings, and notes from your own stack to turn this into a true authority page.
Add screenshots, measured timings, and notes from your own stack to turn this into a true authority page.
Related Guides: