Shifter vs ProxyEmpire
Looking for a ProxyEmpire alternative? The two are level on price at $0.75 per GB, so this comes down to what each network actually serves. Shifter returned more live residential IPs in every one of the five markets we measured, and completed the test where ProxyEmpire dropped a third of its requests.
신뢰하는 기업 50,000+ 전 세계 클라이언트
Every provider in this series gets the same test: plain HTTP, one fresh connection per request, 1,000 concurrent, 10 second timeout. ProxyEmpire completed between 55.9% and 65.7% of requests depending on the market. Most of the shortfall was redirects to the HTTPS form, 25,000 to 83,000 per run, with timeouts making up the rest. The counts below are from those runs exactly as measured. We did not switch transport to lift the number, because a client that loses a third of its requests is something you would rather find out here than in production.
Level on price, so the pool decides
Both providers publish $0.75 per GB at their best rate. This page compares what that buys rather than inventing a saving.
| 월간 사용량 | Shifter | ProxyEmpire | 절약 금액 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 입문형 | $10 5 GB at $2.00/GB | $0.75/GB entry rate | not cheaper |
| 100 GB | $100 $1.00/GB | volume pricing on request | |
| 최저 요금 | $0.75/GB from 200 GB | $0.75/GB entry rate | level |
테스트 중 온라인 상태였던 실시간 IP
Distinct IPs each network had live and reachable at test time, not the size of its total network. ProxyEmpire's figures come from runs where a third to 44% of requests failed, so its true pool is larger than shown. Residential IPs rotate all day, so both providers serve far more addresses across 24 hours.
국가별 모든 지표
Pick a country to see the complete measurement, including the numbers that did not go our way.
| 지표 | Shifter | ProxyEmpire |
|---|---|---|
| 전송된 요청 | 250,000 | 250,000 |
| 테스트 중 실시간 IP | 136,667 | 87,218 |
| 고유 네트워크(ASN) | 1,606 | 1,270 |
| 고유 도시 | 5,813 | 5,191 |
| 평균 지연 시간 | 364 ms | 466 ms |
| 성공률 | 99.8% | 62.6% |
Shifter returned 57% more live US IPs on the same test, 136,667 against 87,218, across 1,606 networks against 1,270, and answered in 364 ms against 466 ms. ProxyEmpire completed 62.6% of its requests. With both networks at $0.75 per GB, the money is identical and the coverage is not.
How we measured this
Every provider in this series receives the identical test: plain HTTP to an IP echo service, one fresh connection per request, 1,000 concurrent, 10 second timeout, and fixed volumes of 250,000 requests in the United States, 100,000 in the United Kingdom, 80,000 in France, 70,000 in Canada and 60,000 in Germany. One connection per request means one fresh exit per request, so distinct addresses map directly to the reachable pool.
ProxyEmpire completed 55.9% to 65.7% of those requests. The failures were redirects to the HTTPS form, between 25,000 and 83,000 per run, plus timeouts. We report the shortfall as observed and do not attribute it to a concurrency ceiling or any other single cause, because these runs were not designed to isolate one.
Both providers ran plain HTTP, so latency is directly comparable on this page. Because ProxyEmpire's counts come from partial runs, its true live pool is larger than the figures shown here. Shifter's lead is wide enough in every market that this does not change the reading.
What these numbers mean
Every count on this page is the number of IPs that were live and reachable at the time of the test, not the size of either provider's network. Residential IPs rotate constantly as real devices come online and drop off, so across a full day both networks serve far more addresses than a single window can capture. What limits a crawl is how many respond at the same moment, which is what this measures.
사용하는 이유 Shifter 레지덴셜 프록시?
A larger live pool in all five markets
57% more in the United States, 62% more in the United Kingdom, 135% more in Canada, 167% more in Germany, and more than fourteen times the pool in France, at the same price per GB.
Completes the test
ProxyEmpire answered 55.9% to 65.7% of requests. A third came back as redirects or timeouts on the standard plain HTTP test.
Faster on the same transport
364 ms against 466 ms in the United States and 441 ms against 597 ms in the United Kingdom. Both ran plain HTTP, so these timings compare directly.
Wider network spread
1,606 US networks against 1,270 and 148 French against 24. Anti-bot systems key on the network an address sits on, so spread does more than raw count.
자주 묻는 질문
Common questions about how we benchmarked ProxyEmpire.
No. Both publish $0.75 per GB at their best rate, and ProxyEmpire offers that as an entry rate. This comparison is about quality of coverage rather than cost, and we would rather say so than invent a saving.
Most came back as redirects to the HTTPS form, between 25,000 and 83,000 per run, with timeouts making up the rest. Its gateway does not reliably serve plain HTTP clients. We are reporting what we measured and not guessing at a cause beyond that, since our runs cannot separate a capacity limit from a configuration one.
It makes it identical, which is the point. Every provider in this series gets the same test, and any of them that cannot complete it is shown not completing it. Because ProxyEmpire's runs were partial, its true pool is larger than the figures here, which we say plainly on the page.
Because it counts IPs live at the time of the test rather than every address ever seen. Residential IPs rotate all day, so the reachable figure at any moment is far smaller than a lifetime total, and it is the one that limits a crawl.
Same price, a deeper pool
More live addresses in every market we measured, on a network that answers the requests you send it, at the same $0.75 per GB. Run the test yourself and compare.