HttpArena
Comparisons

Kotlin web framework comparison: any two, head to head

ktor-tuned is quicker than ktor on 23 of the 31 profiles they both run, and behind on 8. On the HTTP/1.1 composite they score 3899 and 2965.

Pick any two of the 4 Kotlin entries. Requests per second is the best of three runs and the delta is the first column against the second; every row is the same profile at the same connection count, on the same machine. What each profile measures.

ProfileConnsktor-tuned req/secktor req/secDeltaktor-tuned p99ktor p99
Baseline4,0961,421,507958,064+48%10.50ms9.25ms
Pipelined4,0962,519,1872,223,872+13%86.30ms40.50ms
Short-lived4,096551,081705,889-22%73.00ms53.70ms
Async Delay32,000326,652207,601+57%283.80ms198.10ms
Latency-10K1,0249,9819,983-0%135.0us147.0us
Latency-1M1,024998,014997,500+0%2777.0us13756.0us
Latency-500K/81,024266,303211,429+26%9539584.0us11382784.0us
JSON Comp4,096248,285204,299+22%53.00ms78.90ms
JSON Comp16,384216,824205,282+6%225.80ms257.90ms
JSON TLS4,096824,856456,229+81%396.45ms293.41ms
8Gbit51249,24049,330-0%176.0us273.0us
Static TLS1,024253,462245,059+3%156.24ms95.47ms
Async DB1,02449,77750,138-1%24.10ms24.10ms
Fortunes1,02449,99160,733-18%43.10ms30.70ms
Baseline2561,110,873770,207+44%154.19ms121.76ms
Baseline1,0241,016,824727,073+40%380.08ms416.32ms
Static256230,141209,566+10%126.19ms238.51ms
Static1,024222,669131,179+70%449.69ms833.40ms
Baseline (h2c)2561,142,982811,874+41%114.96ms123.08ms
Baseline (h2c)1,0241,079,114726,624+49%332.67ms649.80ms
Baseline (h2c)4,096507,299509,387-0%2.07s1.81s
JSON (h2c)1,024704,528431,461+63%169.29ms421.12ms
JSON (h2c)4,096656,840374,581+75%664.75ms755.42ms
Baseline64380,700340,607+12%28.22ms28.01ms
Static6496,69497,362-1%256.51ms266.09ms
Echo512996,6701,009,467-1%1.24ms1.19ms
Echo4,0961,128,116968,694+16%10.30ms9.80ms
Echo16,384861,762621,301+39%56.60ms53.20ms
Echo Pipelined51211,369,50411,369,170+0%1.72ms2.12ms
Echo Pipelined4,09612,583,93110,895,483+15%16.40ms14.80ms
Echo Pipelined16,38411,470,4728,358,151+37%73.10ms67.50ms

Common comparisons

ktor-tuned vs ktor · ktor-tuned vs http4k · ktor-tuned vs neton · ktor vs http4k · ktor vs neton · http4k vs neton

Questions

Is ktor-tuned faster than ktor?

ktor-tuned is quicker than ktor on 23 of the 31 profiles they both run, and behind on 8. On the HTTP/1.1 composite they score 3899 and 2965. Both run on the same machine, in the same round, against the same profiles.

Is ktor-tuned faster than http4k?

ktor-tuned is quicker than http4k on 10 of the 11 profiles they both run, and behind on 1. On the HTTP/1.1 composite they score 3899 and 1875. Both run on the same machine, in the same round, against the same profiles.

Is ktor-tuned faster than neton?

ktor-tuned is quicker than neton on 19 of the 23 profiles they both run, and behind on 4. On the HTTP/1.1 composite they score 3899 and 2443. Both run on the same machine, in the same round, against the same profiles.

Is ktor faster than http4k?

ktor is quicker than http4k on 11 of the 11 profiles they both run. On the HTTP/1.1 composite they score 2965 and 1875. Both run on the same machine, in the same round, against the same profiles.

Which Kotlin framework is fastest overall?

ktor-tuned holds the highest HTTP/1.1 composite of the Kotlin entries, at 3899. The composite is throughput over the whole suite; if a service is one shape of workload, compare that profile on its own in the table above, because the order changes.

Every Kotlin entry

Results updated · Kotlin composite ranking · Compare across languages · Other languages · Open the leaderboard