FreeToGame vs PotterDB
Same instrument, two spec sheets — measured, not claimed.
FreeToGame vs PotterDB: common questions
Which is more reliable, FreeToGame or PotterDB?
Both are neck-and-neck — FreeToGame and PotterDB each measure 100% uptime over 90 days on our probe schedule. Reliability here is verified from our own scheduled checks; use the 30-day bars above to see which has been steadier lately.
Which is faster, FreeToGame or PotterDB?
FreeToGame has the lower median latency in our checks — FreeToGame responds in 331 ms versus PotterDB at 525 ms (P50). Tail latency (P95) is in the table above; for most workloads the median is the number that shapes how the API feels.
Do FreeToGame and PotterDB need an API key?
Neither needs a paid key — FreeToGame is callable with no signup, and PotterDB is callable with no signup. Both are quick to prototype with; rate limits still apply.
Can I call FreeToGame and PotterDB from the browser?
Yes — both FreeToGame and PotterDB send CORS headers over HTTPS, so front-end code can fetch either directly with no backend proxy. That makes them easy to swap in a client-side app while you compare responses.
Are FreeToGame and PotterDB free for commercial use?
FreeToGame has unclear commercial terms, and PotterDB has unclear commercial terms. We track service terms and the data license as separate fields — see the Commercial use and Data license rows above, and confirm both before shipping either in a paid product.