PotterDB vs Steam
Same instrument, two spec sheets — measured, not claimed.
PotterDB vs Steam: common questions
Which is more reliable, PotterDB or Steam?
On our scheduled checks, PotterDB leads on measured uptime — PotterDB at 99.44% versus Steam at 93.9% over 90 days. These are our own probe results, not provider claims; the uptime bars above show the day-by-day record for both.
Which is faster, PotterDB or Steam?
Steam has the lower median latency in our checks — PotterDB responds in 326 ms versus Steam at 203 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 PotterDB and Steam need an API key?
Neither needs a paid key — PotterDB is callable with no signup, and Steam is callable with no signup. Both are quick to prototype with; rate limits still apply.
Can I call PotterDB and Steam from the browser?
Only PotterDB is browser-friendly — it returns CORS headers over HTTPS. Steam needs a server-side call or proxy, so factor that into which one fits a front-end project.
Are PotterDB and Steam free for commercial use?
PotterDB has unclear commercial terms, and Steam 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.