Author of the blog post here. Thank you all for your insightful comments and critiques. A few points. -> Several people have suggested that JVM's mature GC m

Author of the blog post here. Thank you all for your insightful comments and critiques. A few points. -> Several people have suggested that JVM's mature GC may be using other cores, resulting in the > 370% CPU utilisation. I admit that I do not understand the internals of OpenJDK's GC. However, I would like to point out that 100% of the roughly 1,200,000,000 statistics results instances created during one run are not released until the program terminates. They are all stored in statistics results containers until the very end of the run. However, see below. - From a processing perspective, other than the manipulation of containers and bit sets, almost all of the remaining processing is numeric. It is full of integers and doubles getting added, subtracted, multiplied, divided, square roots calculated, etc., as part of various statistical computations. - Where I needed sets was in preparing the several million working sets over which processing iterations occur. Working sets are prepared based on user's query criteria, several thresholds for filtering elements under a variety of constraints, etc. From a garbage perspective, these working sets are the biggest garbage generated during a run. - Go's numeric performance is certainly very good. I have had good experiences with it in other projects. - It is true that I could not identify the causes to which the performance differences between the Go version and the Java one could be attributed. Was I being naive? Am I incompetent? Possible. As I concluded, this behaviour may be obvious to more informed people, but it surprised _me_, and, that is what I admitted.