Static page HTML must be faster than dynamic page PHP

Title.

In the same environment configuration, data in the same situation, which fast?

Reply to discussion (solution)

The pure static HTML must be fast.

HTML file, of course, because he doesn't need to be processed by PHP.

HTML file, of course, because he doesn't need to be processed by PHP.

Decisive html,php also to read the database, the handler for those

But HTML is not to read the hard disk, PHP is not able to read data from memory

PHP is also read hard, the cache is Apache or other services engaged in

Is it faster to use cache memcache, Eaccelerator, and so on than HTML?

This is of course static less a link, static load is very low

You said the same condition, HTML can also be cached, the PHP cache should be compared with the HTML cache.

But the HTML is not to read the hard disk, PHP is not able to read data from memory is the HTML to read the hard disk, is not the PHP program from the hard disk read it?


Is it faster to use cache memcache, Eaccelerator, and so on than HTML?
Access HTML file: Web server--HTML file
Access PHP Files: Web server--load PHP Interpreter system--Execute PHP file

