However, the combination of Standard Ruby + Thin/Unicorn + Rails is about the slowest possible combination. That on Ruby 2.1 gives you 1,455 req/sec. The fastes

However, the combination of Standard Ruby + Thin/Unicorn + Rails is about the slowest possible combination. That on Ruby 2.1 gives you 1,455 req/sec. The fastest possible combination (JRuby + Torqbox + Rack) gets you 10,159 req/sec. That is giving up 85.67% performance before you write a single useful line of code. That means at best possible performance, the standard rails app is 6.98 times slower than the fastest Ruby code could be. That also means your standard rails app is at least 7 times slower than the comparable Go or Scala app, simply because of your server, runtime, and framework. Part 2 : measure development time without frameworks? ;) awesome work! I enjoyed this as I was making comparisons between puma and unicorn. A co-worker of mine has been battling a rails 3 -> 4 and ruby 1.9 -> 2.1 transition. I'm hoping this helps drive the needle in the right direction.