Hmm, mine are not particularly heavy so I’ve never needed to increase them (a few hundred requests a second at the heaviest, the big calls tend to hit the big server directly because of API access)… You can test it if you want, and it can scale up pretty easily from the $3 one too. 
OvermindDL1
1
DevotionGeo
This is an old thread, but I want to put my two cents.
Everybody knows that benchmarks do not reflect the real world performance, but as this thread is all about benchmarks, so I’ll link to the TechEmpower benchmarks round 14 for ASP.net core and Phoenix.
In Fortunes (benchmark) .net core’s best implementation gives 20,021 responses per second vs Phoenix’s 32,559 responses.
In multiple queries (Full ORMs of both), .net core runs 2,177 requests while Phoenix runs 1,857 requests. (Every request is consisted of 20 queries).
In single queries (again Full ORM versions only), .net core runs 25,827 requests per second vs Phoenix’s 30,182.
In JSON serializations, Revenj (C#'s best) gives 143,516 responses per second vs Phoenix’s 164,921 responses per second.
As you see the values are overlapping. Phoenix beats .net core in 3 benchmarks while .net core beats phoenix in one benchmark, so it proves that Phoenix (Elixir) is not good just in creating persistent websocket connections, but is also good at performing database queries, IO, JSON serialization etc.
As I said earlier benchmarks do not reflect the real world performance, and we should consider other factors too, like how easier some technology is to scale. And when it comes to scaling, Elixir(/Erlang) beats all other technologies.
4
MikeAnthony
“In Fortunes (benchmark) .net core’s best implementation gives 20,021 responses per second vs Phoenix’s 32,559 responses.”
unfortunately if they used only released software thats most likely out of date. Asp.net core 2.0 was released with performance improvements a few weeks ago and that benchmark was done back in May.
4
OndrejValenta
At this moment, 12.8.2019, the numbers of Fortunes are like this:
Phoenix: 175 phoenix 53,383
ASP.NET Core: 14 aspcore-ado-pg 300,613 with one error
It does not say which version of ASP NET Core exactly but I assume it’s one of 2.2.5-6 versions.
Question is why is Phoenix slower 6x times. It is faster than it used to be but still.
I understand the safety part of Phoenix. There is no production debugging in ASP.NET Core, you could produce a dump and WinDbg it but good luck with that rabbit hole. Especially, when it runs on linux machine. But when you read here about erlang and cowboy and how fast they are with hardware how can it be way slower that ASP.NET Core, I don’t get it. It has to be a configuration issue.
The first one is Actix (Rust): actix-core 702,165 which is cca 14times faster.
In data updates the situation is even worse. ASP NET Core is almost ten times faster than Phoenix.
In multiple queries ASP NET Core is just 6x times better.
I’m not bragging about ASP NET Core I would love to switch to something better and be done with Microsoft for good but the results are unconvincing. 
It is not a cheap machine they are running the test on. It’s actually a pretty small beast.
1
kaashyapan
Please dont take the Techempower benchmarks seriously. None of the code that I know of is written how you’d write it normally in a project. Its all gamed to look good.
Dustin Moris Gorski on Twitter:
4