It may not be a victory across the board, but it certainly isn't a loss across the board. That's all I'm saying. Let me answer some of your points more specifi

It may not be a victory across the board, but it certainly isn't a loss across the board. That's all I'm saying. Let me answer some of your points more specifically: NUMA is a concern, but with some work on the schedular to give goroutines slight affinity for threads, this can be largely mitigated. This could be as simple as a scheduler policy like `take the first queued goroutine that previously executed on this thread, looking upto 5 into the queue, otherwise take the first one` instead of `always take the first one`. The difficulty with this strategy is you could experience starvation of goroutines, and there are a ton of other complexities, which is why the current scheduler is so simple. I believe this will get better... Context switching isn't the issue with threaded implementations of servers. Writing a server with a thread per connection is a bad idea because of the memory requirements. 1000 connections will lead to gigabytes of memory in use. I don't think Go's performance envelope has shrunk or become less predictable, IMO. I think what we've given up is control over what threads execute what goroutines, essentially, the NUMA argument above. This will hopefully get better with time.