Conclusions

        These tests show that HANDS DOWN Lighttpd is more efficent and faster than Apache at serving static content.  If you extrapolate the CPU data out (given enough bandwidth), Apache will use 100% CPU at about 5,000 req/second (not too bad).  But Lighttpd will use 100% CPU to server around 18,000 req/second!!!  WOW!!!  (These are simple math problems, and do not account for things like memory bandwidth or other walls).  Not to mention that Lighttpd serves the content faster. 

         Stay tuned!  I am in the process of benchmarking Apache/Mod_PHP vs. Lighttpd/FastCGI!  Keep an eye out for this and more (including Joomla Benchmarks).

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (2)

There are a few
written by ircmaxell, May 21, 2007

There are a few hosting companies using Lighttpd. Infact, I am currently working over the finances of starting a lighttpd hosting company. I have one idea that might revolutionize hosting (If I can work out the logistics of it).

very interesting
written by bobthebob01, May 20, 2007

Ircmaxell,

Thanks for this benchmark, i am curious to see the next ones.
But if this seems to be a good set up to optimize speed, why hosting company don't set up their server like this. Sorry i might lack general knowledge on this, but is it possible to use that set up for a shared server, or would it involve to much set up and tech support to do this on a SS. Or is it because it would require too much hardware?
Interesting! these benchmarks deserve a thread in the forum

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment