Architecture firm websites: 20 measured on a phone
The usual list of “best architecture websites” shows screenshots and names a favourite. None of the six pages we read before writing this one measured how those sites actually load. So we did: 20 architecture firm websites, named in design-award roundups and search results, each tested three times on a simulated slow phone connection. The median across all 20: 7.9 seconds for the main content to appear. Only three met Google’s own “good” threshold of 2.5 seconds, and all three show text first, not a photo.
How we measured
We use Google’s PageSpeed Insights API for our other guides, but its free quota is exhausted right now. So this page uses our own stand instead.
- Slow 4G150 ms latency, 1.6 Mbit/s download
- ×4processor slowdown, cache off
- 3 runsper site — the table shows the median
Playwright, Chrome, phone screen · 26 October 2026
This is not a PageSpeed score — Lighthouse weighs several measurements into one number by its own formula. We are reporting two things directly: Largest Contentful Paint (LCP), the moment the main content appears, and the page’s weight in megabytes.
Three of the 20 (Gensler, Hufft, Make Architects) were still loading more content after a full minute on this connection. Their LCP numbers are the largest element seen within that minute, not a final result.
Where our own demo lands
We ran the identical test on VORMLAND, our demo site for an architecture studio: same phone emulation, same slow connection, same three runs. Median LCP: 0.8 seconds, 1.3 MB, about ten times faster than the median of the 20 firms below.
To be fair about what that number counts: on VORMLAND the largest element at 0.8 seconds is the panel that links back to our studio, a text block with a small background image. The first project photo arrived at about 1.5 seconds in an extra run, which is still inside Google’s 2.5 seconds. The difference is in what loads first and in what order, the same kind of fix covered in our Core Web Vitals guide.
Three of the 20 firm websites met Google’s 2.5-second “good” threshold. All three show text first, not a photo.
Our own demo, VORMLAND, loads its main content in 0.8 seconds on the same test, about ten times faster than the median.
What 20 architecture firm websites measured
Sorted fastest to slowest. Weight is the data transferred before the page went quiet.
| Firm | LCP | Weight | What appears first |
|---|---|---|---|
| Olson Kundig | 1.0 s | 0.7 MB | a text heading |
| Studio Gang | 2.0 s | 0.8 MB | a text paragraph |
| CO Architects | 2.0 s | 1.9 MB | a text heading |
| Snøhetta | 4.3 s | 0.7 MB | a project photo |
| Herzog & de Meuron | 4.8 s | 1.9 MB | the search field |
| GLUCK+ | 5.0 s | 1.6 MB | a project photo |
| Minarc | 5.4 s | 2.4 MB | a text block |
| Hufft | 7.3 s* | 6.2 MB | a “scroll” link |
| SOM | 7.7 s | 1.2 MB | a cookie banner |
| ZGF Architects | 7.9 s | 1.3 MB | a text heading |
| Zaha Hadid Architects | 8.2 s | 1.5 MB | a cookie banner |
| Studio Bark | 10.0 s | 3.2 MB | a video thumbnail |
| Populous | 10.2 s | 1.4 MB | a cookie banner |
| BIG | 11.1 s | 2.8 MB | a project photo |
| Perkins&Will | 11.8 s | 3.3 MB | an unlabelled block |
| MVRDV | 14.3 s | 4.2 MB | a project photo |
| Foster + Partners | 27.7 s | 7.7 MB | a hero video |
| Make Architects | 37.1 s* | 5.4 MB | a cookie banner |
| Gensler | 46.1 s* | 4.9 MB | a hero video |
| Feldman Architecture | not reported | 0.7 MB | the browser reported no LCP |
* Still loading after 60 seconds on this connection; see “How we measured” above. Median across the 19 with an LCP: 7.9 seconds; median weight of all 20: 1.9 MB. When the largest element is a cookie banner, the main photo had not appeared yet or was smaller than the banner.
What made the slow ones slow
The three sites inside 2.5 seconds all show text first: a heading or a paragraph. On the slow ones, the first screen waits for a large image or a video, and the page carries several megabytes.
Foster + Partners is the clearest case: 7.7 MB spread across many large photos, and the poster of its hero video appeared after about 28 seconds. Three of the 20 firms hadn’t finished loading everything a full minute in; on a real slow connection, a visitor would have given up long before that.
This says nothing about the buildings or the firms. A website that takes 10 seconds to show its first photo on a slow connection can still represent excellent architecture. It is a separate decision: is the site built to be seen by everyone who visits, including the share of visitors on a slow or congested connection, not just a fast office line?
What this doesn’t tell you
This is a lab test on one connection profile, run from one location, not real visitor data.
A firm’s actual visitors might be on faster connections than we simulated, or slower ones. What it reliably tells you is the order things load in, and which element a visitor sees first. That order stays the same on a faster connection; only the waiting gets shorter.
We measure your main pages on a phone and list the fixes in order of benefit for the work. You get a short document, not a sales call.
Send it with the button on the right→
Questions about these measurements
How fast should an architecture firm's website load?
Google's own guidance is 2.5 seconds or less for the main content to appear (LCP), for three out of four visits. Only three of the 20 sites we measured met that on a slow phone connection, and all three show text first.
Do award-winning architecture websites load fast?
Mostly not, on the evidence here. The 20 sites come from design-award roundups and search results for "best architecture websites", 16 of them took longer than 2.5 seconds on a slow phone connection, and one reported no LCP.
What slows an architecture website down the most?
In this sample, making the first screen wait for a large image or video. The fastest three show text first; on Foster + Partners the poster of the hero video appeared after about 28 seconds.
Can you measure my firm's website the same way?
Yes. Send us your address for a free website review: no sales call, just a short document with your site's own numbers and what to fix first.