References
- Type: Image. Title: “Traffic by Operating System”. Publisher: [“Pornhub”>“2025 YEAR IN REVIEW”]. Published: 2025-12-03. Accessed: 2025-12-16T23:00Z. URI: https://www.pornhub.com/insights/2025-year-in-review.
- Location: §“Traffic by Operating System”.


22.4% of 5% base, so in actuality a 1% increase. While the title is technically accurate, it’s very misleading.
A percentage increase is a relative increase. The thing you’re thinking of would be described as “percentage points”.
It’s somewhat misleading to talk about a large percentage increase on a small base, though.
Yes, as I pointed out it is technically correct. Just a misleading first impression.
It’s not at all misleading. That’s how percantages work. It plainly says ‘+22.4%’, which is fully factual and accurate. Your ‘actual 1% increase’ is a false statement. It’s a 1 percentage point increase, which is completely separate from the regular percantage.
I’m struggling to understand why you think the title is misleading. Could you elaborate on your rationale to help me understand? 🙂
Do you perhaps have an alternative title that you would suggest? Would you be satisfied by something like, for example, “Pornhub saw a 22.4% increase in Linux traffic (from [e.g.] 5% to ~6%) over 2025”?
Sure! As is currently written, it gives the first impression (to me, at least) that the traffic share of Linux has jumped from x% to (x+22)%. Now I understand that this is subjective, but I believe that’s how many people would read it at first glance as well.
Again, there’s nothing technically inaccurate about it, but the 22% number there is imo distracting and tends to lead to misunderstandings. I would personally write it as “Pornhub sees Linux traffic share increase from 5% to 6% (22.4% increase) over 2025”
Well it is an increase of 22,4 percent but at the same time an increase of 1 percentage point. So both are correct. But as we know bigger number more better so thats what we got