Infatica Review
A deep pool behind a gateway that refuses plain HTTP, priced for enterprise volume.
The short version
- Infatica returned 260,977 live IPs across five countries, the third deepest result in our series.
- It led the United States with 139,334 live addresses, 2% ahead of our own figure.
- Its gateway refuses plain HTTP: all 560,000 requests in our standard test came back as redirects, so the pool figures come from a tunnelled re-run.
- Pricing is steep at the entry end: $3.84 per GB for 25 GB, with $2.60 reserved for the 1 TB tier.
At a glance
What we measured
Live IPs each network had answering during the same test window, five countries, identical request volumes and concurrency for both sides.
| Country | Infatica | Shifter | Networks |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 139,334 | 136,667 | 1,279 |
| United Kingdom | 46,332 | 53,506 | 153 |
| France | 26,877 | 33,581 | 44 |
| Canada | 31,723 | 33,485 | 212 |
| Germany | 16,711 | 22,005 | 154 |
The gateway will not answer plain HTTP
Every provider in our series receives the identical test: plain HTTP, one fresh connection per request, 1,000 concurrent, ten second timeout. Infatica completed none of it. All 560,000 requests were answered with a redirect to the HTTPS form.
This is a configuration choice rather than a fault, and HTTPS proxying is a perfectly normal way to run a network. But it is a real constraint on your integration: point an ordinary HTTP client at this gateway and you get redirects instead of data, and every request has to carry a TLS handshake.
To produce comparable pool figures at all we re-ran Infatica over a CONNECT tunnel at the same volumes. That is why no latency number appears anywhere on this page: the tunnel adds a handshake that the plain-HTTP runs do not carry, so any timing would measure our transport rather than their network.
A deeper pool than the advertised figure suggests
Infatica advertises 15M+ IPs, one of the smaller claims in the market, yet it returned 260,977 live addresses across five countries, ahead of networks advertising ten times as many. That is a useful reminder that advertised totals and live availability are different measurements.
It led the United States outright with 139,334 against the 136,667 we recorded, a gap of about 2%. We led the other four countries, most clearly in Germany at 22,005 against 16,711.
Spread was reasonable at 1,842 operators across the five countries, though France was thin at 44 networks against our 148.
Pricing
| Plan | Traffic | Per GB | Monthly |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starter | 25 GB | $3.84 | $96 |
| Mid | 100 GB | ~$3.00 | ~$300 |
| Scale | 1 TB | $2.60 | $2,600 |
Pros and cons
- Third deepest pool in our series, 260,977 live addresses across five countries
- Led the United States, 139,334 against our 136,667
- Third deepest pool in the series once tunnelled
- City-level targeting across 100+ countries
- Its gateway refuses plain HTTP entirely, redirecting every request to the HTTPS form
- No comparable latency figure, because the tunnel changes what is being measured
- $3.84 per GB at the entry tier, and $2.60 needs 1 TB
- Only 44 French networks against 148 on the widest-spread network we measured
Who Infatica is for
- Your client already uses HTTPS proxying and the tunnel is no obstacle.
- You need depth in the United States, where it measured ahead of most of the field.
- You buy at or near terabyte volume where the rate improves.
- Your tooling points a plain HTTP client at the gateway, which simply will not work.
- You are starting small, since evaluation costs $4 and the entry rate is $3.84 per GB.
- You need published latency figures to compare, which the tunnel makes impossible.
How we scored it
| Criterion | Weight | Score | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Live pool measured | 25% | 8.4 | 260,977 IPs live across five countries, against the tested field. |
| Network spread measured | 20% | 6.8 | 1,842 distinct networks across five countries. |
| Price per GB measured | 25% | 5.6 | $2.60 per GB, which requires the 1 TB tier. A 100 GB buyer pays around $3.00 and the 25 GB entry tier is $3.84. |
| Response time | 10% | 5 | Not comparable: this gateway required a TLS tunnel, so timings measure our transport. |
| Country coverage | 10% | 5.1 | 100+ countries advertised, scaled against full global coverage. |
| Features | 5% | 6.5 | City targeting, sticky sessions and SOCKS5 are present, but plain HTTP proxying is refused and concurrency is plan-dependent rather than unlimited. |
| Transparency | 5% | 6 | Pricing is published, but the trial is paid and the HTTPS-only requirement is not obvious until a plain HTTP client fails against it. |