If your workload does lots of small, concurrent disk reads (a busy database, a user-facing app), Hetzner. If it is memory-bound or throughput work (builds, batch jobs, storage), Contabo's extra RAM and disk win.
Side by side
| Hetzner | Contabo | |
|---|---|---|
| RAM and storage per euro | Good | Higher |
| NVMe IOPS (measured, directional) | ~38,000 | ~12,000 |
| CPU | AMD EPYC on higher tiers | Solid, older on entry |
| Included traffic | ~20 TB | Generous |
| Regions | EU strong, US present | EU, US, Asia, Australia |
| Setup fee | None | Sometimes on larger plans |
The one number that decides it
Disk IOPS. Hetzner's NVMe delivers roughly three times Contabo's in independent tests. For a database serving many users at once, that is the user experience. For a CI runner, a scraper, a backup target or a Minecraft server, it is irrelevant and Contabo's bigger RAM and disk are the better buy.
The verdict
Hetzner for anything user-facing and latency-sensitive, and for EU workloads generally. Contabo for memory-heavy or batch workloads, wider geographic choice, and when you want the most raw resources for the lowest price.
Prices checked September 2026. Hosting prices change often and vary by region and term. Confirm the current number on the provider's own site before you buy. Where we could not verify a figure we left it out.