Seems like there was a misunderstanding here. Note that there are different iterations of the tests, and we are talking about the ones published as " **round 17** ".
Also note that there are 12 result tab combinations: 6 tests times 2 test environments. **Nim participated in four of the twelve results** (with its fastest framework coming in #1, #20, #10, and #14), and **Nim didn 't participate in eight of the results**. Nim hasn't yet submitted code for most of the tests on TechEmpower. I keep this thread active to encourage more qualified people than myself to look into this. [My post](https://forum.nim-lang.org/t/1152#27100) had emphasized the good news, because it was indeed a big achievement. I'm sorry if that was the cause of the confusion. I think good Web benchmarks results are very important for Nim's popularity advancement. Every major business has a Web-site, and internal apps that are increasingly Web-based. Many users of scripting languages start considering a statically-typed compiled language when they realize their current code doesn't scale, and Nim should be an especially good candidate for people coming from Python. > the memory is the same for all The **total** memory is the same for all frameworks: 32g in the "physical" test environment (Dell R440) and 14g in "cloud" test environment (Azure D3v2). But different tests **used** a different amount of memory. Which IMHO an important thing to measure. That's why I Let's say I have a Web service that needs fairly little storage, bandwidth, and CPU; and it has the same memory requirements for decent performance as the memory usage in TechEmpower's "Plain Text" test on Azure. If I use a memory framework that used <2GB RAM (ex. go fasthttp), I only need $7/month for [VPS hosting](http://ramnode.com/vps.php). But if I use a memory-hungry framework (ex. java comsat-servlet-undertow), I would pay $28/month for the extra RAM. Very big difference! > lots of mem can only somewhat minimize java's disadvantage. That's exactly my point. Lots of RAM hides the fact that Java would be slower on a cheaper server / cloud instance. > I love Nim and consider it to be the (almost) perfect language (that just > needs a bit more growing up and mature). Amen. * * * In other news, a less popular anecdote [I mentioned here](https://forum.nim-lang.org/t/1152#22964) ([tbrand/which_is_the_fastest](https://github.com/the-benchmarker/web-frameworks) now redirects to [the-benchmarker/web-frameworks](https://github.com/the-benchmarker/web-frameworks)) has been updated, and it seems Nim there is out of tune. It has two results: * [Latency](https://github.com/the-benchmarker/web-frameworks#latency) \- Jester's 6.82ms average isn't bad, but the table being sorted by the 50th percentile makes it look worse. * [Requests Per Second](https://github.com/the-benchmarker/web-frameworks#requests-per-seconds) \- Jester has the highest throughput (315.19 MB), but comes 7th in RPS.
