Test tools for Websites - post them here!
In terms of speeding up website loading times, I've found this plugin to be the best as speeding up the site (and I've tested a fair few)
https://en-gb.wordpress.org/plugins/wp-fastest-cache/
It's always made an immediate difference
Essentially, turn on every setting that's available in the free version, except for "Mobile: Don't show the cached version for desktop to mobile devices"
Just picking up on this comment as while you've pointed the finger at the host (myself), this isn't the issue, i.e. simply moving hosts won't improve the score Google is giving it. Sites on the same server give server response times in the same test in under Google's recommended 0.2s. The "server response time" in that test is an umbrella for a lot of things - basically everything needed before the page is able to render to the browser.Originally Posted by yourdj
The main contender on all my research though was the host - it took 9.5 seconds for your one to respond, the second test went to 13%! This is the first thing any agency will say and it will cost you hundreds to put right, especially if you start moving hosts and they manage it for you. You can save some cash by doing it yourself, but for ease/professional service maybe an agent is the way forward.
This includes any and all HTML / JS / CSS required, which may come from external sources (in this one, mostly Google Fonts which are normally OK, but Instagram and tawk.to are adding almost 1.5 seconds).
The more complicated (or unnecessarily bloated, or poorly coded) a site is the longer it'll take to load. There are cache / minify / compression / CDN settings between the server setup / website code / Wordpress plugins that'll improve things, but that general rule remains. I currently recommend W3TC (https://en-gb.wordpress.org/plugins/w3-total-cache/) and Cloudflare as a good starting point for Wordpress sites (see http://www.bloggingwizard.com/w3-tot...he-cloudflare/).
To get Wordpress to run super fast, you'd normally be looking at your own VPS server so you could set it just as you need it, running Litespeed instead of Apache (https://www.litespeedtech.com/benchmarks/wordpress) using HTTP2 (https://www.litespeedtech.com/produc...http-2-support) and then tweaking further, so you'd be in to around the £150 per month mark (but you could host many sites on that). You'd still need to make sure your WP sites were as quick as they could be, though - no bloat!
Just one more quick comment re http://www.spiritshigh.co.uk/, the login form (accessed through the navigation on every page) causes Chrome to say every page is not secure as there's a password field on the page. Either add an SSL (which would mean losing Cloudflare as it's not compatible) or change the login nav item to just a link, so that only the login page has the password field on it.
Just to add to this, I had a closer look and the Instagram images are all for the widget in the footer, which while showing the 12 most recent images from Instagram at 50x50, loads them at 640x640 and then resizes them with CSS.
The 12 large images add 874Kb to the page payload, whereas if they were loaded at the size displayed they'd be a total of 20Kb for all 12.
It's as simple as changing the URL for the image, from (for example) http://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51...86930432_n.jpg to http://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51...86930432_n.jpg
Note the change from s640x640 to s50x50 in the image address.
I don't know where that's set, maybe in an Instagram plugin you have installed, or in the theme widget somewhere, but if that can be changed it's a simple change that would make a big difference.
You should also optimise the images that Google is saying should be done (the ones hosted locally). You can download them already optimised from the pagespeed results page (just let me know if you want me to do it for you, FOC).
OK, I tweaked the Instagram widget code (wp-content/plugins/wp-instagram-widget/wp-instagram-widget.php) to size thumbnails at 50 x 50 rather than 160 x 160, and changed the "Photo Size" in WP Admin -> Apperance -> Widgets -> Footer Sidebar #2 from "Large" (which was the 640x640) to "Thumbnail" (which is now 50x50).
I also uploaded all the optimised images Google was recommending (with the ones they provided), so the whole images part of their recommendations should now be gone (for the Home Page, at least)
Hope this is OK, the original images are still there appended with ".original" if you need them....
Just to add to this, I had a closer look and the Instagram images are all for the widget in the footer, which while showing the 12 most recent images from Instagram at 50x50, loads them at 640x640 and then resizes them with CSS.
The 12 large images add 874Kb to the page payload, whereas if they were loaded at the size displayed they'd be a total of 20Kb for all 12.
It's as simple as changing the URL for the image, from (for example) http://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51...86930432_n.jpg to http://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51...86930432_n.jpg
Note the change from s640x640 to s50x50 in the image address.
I don't know where that's set, maybe in an Instagram plugin you have installed, or in the theme widget somewhere, but if that can be changed it's a simple change that would make a big difference.
You should also optimise the images that Google is saying should be done (the ones hosted locally). You can download them already optimised from the pagespeed results page (just let me know if you want me to do it for you, FOCMarc,OK, I tweaked the Instagram widget code (wp-content/plugins/wp-instagram-widget/wp-instagram-widget.php) to size thumbnails at 50 x 50 rather than 160 x 160, and changed the "Photo Size" in WP Admin -> Apperance -> Widgets -> Footer Sidebar #2 from "Large" (which was the 640x640) to "Thumbnail" (which is now 50x50).
I also uploaded all the optimised images Google was recommending (with the ones they provided), so the whole images part of their recommendations should now be gone (for the Home Page, at least)
Hope this is OK, the original images are still there appended with ".original" if you need them....
You are a Superstar! Thanks for doing that feel free to do anymore bits if you want
I've run it through "Toby's Checker" and it now scores 46 Mobile (was 19) & 59 Desktop (was 25) Incidentally, now better than yourdj.co.uk!!
This is why this forum should never be let to get as close to disappearing as it was recently . The font of knowledge on here is outstanding and I could have no doubt been charged £000's for a few little tweeks that our lovely members have offered up for free!
Professional DJ & Event services inc Led & Starlight dancefloors, Venue uplighting
Derbyshire Wedding DJ - Wedding Uplighting, Dancefloors and Professional Wedding DJs
Nice one Marc.
Yes I guess, although people know what they are going too, Ebay takes forever sometimes, but I still wait for it
Thats the best reported free one. I use this.
Oh sorry Marc, assumed it was a random cheap one.
Well done for investigating it, i am no expert, just judging from my own experiences this week.
Out must be nice to have an actual person helping out, rather than a techyy in a call centre.
I did have a tech guy, but he has moved on to bigger and better things now.
Its not my test, its googles website analytical tool. Probably the best free one i have come across.
I have had the caching software off today/yesterday. it wont allow me to edit the site with it on for some reason.
Its gone down a bit to 67 & 70 but I have added a few bits to the footer, so thats probably why.
Thats a much better score, if you have enquiries monitored, then the results in a month or two would be interesting.
My guess is people were just getting bored and clicking off before it loaded. Its a great site so you should get business from it.
Last edited by yourdj; 19-05-2017 at 05:05 PM.
Test tools for Websites - post them here!
Oh sorry Marc, assumed it was a random cheap one.
Can't have you beating us, Toby....so I made a few more tweaksI have had the caching software off today/yesterday. it wont allow me to edit the site with it on for some reason.
Its gone down a bit to 67 & 70 but I have added a few bits to the footer, so thats probably why.
https://developers.google.com/speed/...shigh.co.uk%2F
Nice.
Can't have you beating us, Toby....so I made a few more tweaks
https://developers.google.com/speed/...shigh.co.uk%2F
I just added that fastest wp thing to my HDA site and look what happened!!
I also updated all the plugins, so its not necessarily the WO fastest cache.
From this:
to this:
Looks like it may be a conflicting between the theme and the plugin??
Last edited by yourdj; 19-05-2017 at 09:21 PM.
Whilst we're testing website speeds - Google gives a "ranking" - but doesn't indicate load speed.
Worth also running through this (where you'll see the biggest results that a cache plugin achieves)
https://tools.pingdom.com/
Use Sweden as the "test from" location as it's most local.
I'll start the benchmark with my result:
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
