# Techempower benchmarks **URL:** \ **Category:** Discussions\ **Tags:** benchmarks\ **Created:** [March 2, 2016, 6:10pm UTC](https://forum.elixirforum.com/t/techempower-benchmarks/171 "2016-03-02T18:10:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 20
**Author:** ![kseg](https://forum.elixirforum.com/user_avatar/forum.elixirforum.com/kseg/32/6178_2.png) [@kseg](https://forum.elixirforum.com/u/kseg)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 1:06pm UTC](https://forum.elixirforum.com/t/techempower-benchmarks/171/20 "2017-05-30T13:06:00Z")
It might be a bad way to compare frameworks, but it’s a pretty good way to compare the performance of HTTP servers and database drivers. Personally, I think it’s safe to say that both `net/http` and Cowboy satisfy the HTTP specification, provide a usable interface to build frameworks on top of, are capable of scaling beyond a single core and have proven to be fairly robust. At that point, performance (latency, throughput, memory usage, …) **is** the only factor. At least, it’s the only factor from the point of view of people working on these components. I agree that to a consumer, maybe speed isn’t the only factor. They are very different in another respect: one lets you run Go code, the other lets you run Erlang/Elixir code. Maybe that ought to weigh more on your decision than an X% difference in performance. Or maybe not. I don’t know what your needs are, and I’m not going to assume that performance isn’t really important to you. People will take whatever value from these benchmarks as they want. Yes, a lot of that will be misguided. And yes, it’s useful to regurgitate the typical “these benchmarks are flawed” and “it doesn’t represent the real world” (which is a pretty condescending thing to say to strangers, really, what people mean is it doesn’t represent THEIR real world). I know that we’re largely saying the same thing, I just wanted to get the last word in 🙂 --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.elixirforum.com/t/techempower-benchmarks/171)._