Have a look at these: http://www.earth.org.uk/note-on-site-technicals-2.html http://www.earth.org.uk/note-on-site-technicals-2.html http://www.earth.org.uk/no

Have a look at these: http://www.earth.org.uk/note-on-site-technicals-2.html http://www.earth.org.uk/note-on-site-technicals-2.html http://www.earth.org.uk/note-on-carbon-cost-of-CDN.html http://www.earth.org.uk/note-on-carbon-cost-of-CDN.html Basically measuring time to first byte (TTFB) (and indeed visually complete etc) as a reasonable correlate of perceived performance, for a simple site over http from my RPi vs via CloudFlare fully cached http and https. The most direct comparison is of a separate fossil site, but other measuring tools show (generally) my RPi http beats or matches CDN http beats CDN https (with HTTP/2 etc) for a UK visitor. Tests are made from WebpageTest and StatusCake in the main, both from their test points in the UK in various data centers. These sites of mine are UK focussed, not global, so the UK test points are representative, I believe, and should be advantageous to the CDN since it is terminated closer and faster to the client than I can be, from by kitchen cupboard!