Visiting two different websites piqued my curiosity:
Upon analyzing the CSS files, I discovered that on the Apple site, landingpage.css had a 34.6KB transferred size and a 411KB resource size. Meanwhile, on the Lenovo site, core.css showed a 44.2KB transferred size and a 289KB resource size.
Interestingly, although Lenovo's resource size is smaller than Apple's by 122KB, the transferred size is actually about 10KB larger?
To test this further, I conducted an experiment on my own website with two CSS files under the same conditions. The results were surprising: CSS1: Size - 400KB, Transferred Size - 89KB CSS2: Size - 780KB, Transferred Size - 70KB Both files were compressed using brotli compression.
This discrepancy begs the question: Why does the transferred size not always correlate directly with the resource size?