I'm not so sure. This is a company that sells sub $100 computers after all.
It depends on the type of ARM core and the manufacturing process. If it has 24 A53 cores then it wouldn't beat a 4 core desktop CPU from 2012. If it has 24 A72 cores but a manufacturing process older than 28nm then it still wouldn't be competitive with anything on 14nm or better.
A53 cores can use as little as tens of milliwatts... these aren't going to compete with Xeon or whatever high performance CPU's are being run in today's clouds... but for a static website at Wix (or whatever), you don't really need that performance majority of the time for majority of their customers.
Same goes with most long-running VPS'... bursts of activity here and there or once a day or whatever.
Being able to run those workloads on cheaper cores that consume far less power would be a huge win. Not all workloads would be a good fit, but those which are, this can be big.
They're A53 cores at 1Ghz assuming the article is right about it using the SC2A11. Multithread performance will probably be in the ballpark of a high end Android phone or a dual core laptop.
The parent mentioned it would be a good server for build operations that require an ARM cpu. Perhaps you meant cross compiling on an old CPU would still be faster, but there may be demand for native ARM build machines.
It depends on the type of ARM core and the manufacturing process. If it has 24 A53 cores then it wouldn't beat a 4 core desktop CPU from 2012. If it has 24 A72 cores but a manufacturing process older than 28nm then it still wouldn't be competitive with anything on 14nm or better.