Hello friends!
I'm about to install a cache plugin for the WP site I'm working on currently and I've managed to shorten my list of candidates to two options.
On the one hand there's W3 total Cache, which seems to be a great option with a good score online and most, if not all, the features I'm looking for, such as defer parsing for JS.
192.168.0.1 routerlogin 192.168.l.l
On the other hand there's Litespeed Cache which has a good rating, most of the features I want but is recommended much less than W3...the thing is though, the host on which the site is on uses litespeed as a web server, so when I have asked them, they say both options are great, though litespeed cache has the advantage of being able to further exploit the litespeed web server. Though I don't know to which extent this is going to be an advantage over W3.
I would like to know anyones opinion on the matter, specially if you've used one or both of them and can tell me more about which possibility might be better.
Thank you!
I'm about to install a cache plugin for the WP site I'm working on currently and I've managed to shorten my list of candidates to two options.
On the one hand there's W3 total Cache, which seems to be a great option with a good score online and most, if not all, the features I'm looking for, such as defer parsing for JS.
192.168.0.1 routerlogin 192.168.l.l
On the other hand there's Litespeed Cache which has a good rating, most of the features I want but is recommended much less than W3...the thing is though, the host on which the site is on uses litespeed as a web server, so when I have asked them, they say both options are great, though litespeed cache has the advantage of being able to further exploit the litespeed web server. Though I don't know to which extent this is going to be an advantage over W3.
I would like to know anyones opinion on the matter, specially if you've used one or both of them and can tell me more about which possibility might be better.
Thank you!
Last edited:
