Comments on: Performance benchmark of popular PHP frameworks

By: Peter Masterson

Peter Masterson — Wed, 02 Dec 2015 22:20:50 +0000

You should also report TTFB for the frameworks. In my experience, Phalcon’s TTFB has been as much as 95% lower than a framework like Laravel, and as another gentleman posted above, TTFB is pretty much the measurement of responsiveness in a website. If the page renders in 10ms, it doesn’t matter to the end user if it took 300ms to start rendering.

LikeLike

By: Zack

Zack — Tue, 22 Jul 2014 15:55:04 +0000

Would love to see MODX tossed in the mix. Maybe you could run both Evolution and Revolution versions?
MODX is interesting in that all the content is stored only in database (though it doesn’t have to be), so using database performance tools (versus file system tools) can really speed it up.

Thanks

LikeLike

By: Waleed Gadelkareem

Waleed Gadelkareem — Tue, 24 Jun 2014 18:54:50 +0000

Can you add Yii2 to the list?

LikeLike

By: Alan Seiden

Alan Seiden — Tue, 10 Jun 2014 18:01:55 +0000

You’ve made a sincere effort here. Could you tell us more about your methodology? As you say, it’s difficult to compare framework speed when there are so many variables, yet, perhaps contrary to your intention, people are relying on your results as the full truth.

A basic question to start: what version of each framework did you use? (Some frameworks get faster as they mature; others may slow down. An example of speeding up was Zend Framework 2 [one that I know pretty well], which started slow with their DI component, then later sped up without it.)

Did you use each framework’s “quick start” application? It seems that you tweaked each one to try to make them somewhat equal. Nevertheless, each quick start application may have been created to demonstrate different features, whether performance, ease of use, or enterprise capabilities. For example, ZF 2’s quick start application enables a translation service to demonstrate a multilingual setup. This will slow down the application, but as an optional setting, doesn’t mean the framework itself has to be slow. What I’m getting at: despite your best efforts, your results may actually be testing the speed of the quick start applications, not the frameworks alone–or perhaps a combination of both.

You also touched on the fact that your framework choice, Zend, can be accelerated by production-ready performance configurations that are not reflected in the quick start application. Other frameworks may have similar techniques and recommendations not reflected here. (Perhaps framework makers should produce two quick start apps: one simple setup and one tweaked for performance, as a guide for experienced users and for benchmark testers.)

I’ll be interested to hear your thoughts.

LikeLike

By: CJ

CJ — Fri, 02 May 2014 14:47:00 +0000

Another vote for adding Fat Free Framekwork (F3) and PHPixie to this benchmark.

LikeLike

By: Luca

Luca — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 17:11:10 +0000

Hi, good article!

Can you please add also to this benchmark the PHPixie framework?

LikeLike

By: Luca

Luca — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 17:09:35 +0000

Hi, good article!

CAM you please add also to this benchmark the PHPixie framework?

LikeLike

By: RaviTeja.K

RaviTeja.K — Mon, 17 Mar 2014 16:58:15 +0000

hey can you add F3 and laravel framework to this list. I feel that i f3 might go second but fall behind phalcon, and i even want to know did you used opcode cache for all these tests

LikeLike

By: Tom

Tom — Thu, 16 Jan 2014 22:56:15 +0000

Would like to see you benchmark the Lithium framework through the same process. Keep in mind everyone who goes to run a benchmark is going to end up with different results…But for poops and giggles, it’d be interesting to see. I do agree with the point made that the primary concern is not performance. You are hitting the nail on the head there. It is development speed and maintainability. Hardware gets faster and faster and cheaper and cheaper. So to the point of Wojtek there, yes you can magically take the same app from 300ms to 30ms. Not by adding more servers perhaps, but by changing your code and/or your hardware. Of course your already fast codebase will run faster.

LikeLike

By: Jason

Jason — Tue, 31 Dec 2013 21:53:07 +0000

No, but it’s roughly as close as you’re going to get. Phalcon compiles in as a PHP module, effectively providing “native” PHP functions, the same way PHP modules like php5-gd and php5-mcrypt, etc. do. It “becomes part of PHP”, as it were; you don’t have to include anything. It’s just there waiting to be used.

LikeLike