Skip to main content
Version: 1.7

Results

Note: Different serializers and configurations excel in different workloads. Benchmark results are for reference only. For your specific use case, conduct benchmarks with appropriate configurations and workloads.

Java Benchmark​

The Java benchmark section compares Fory against popular Java serialization frameworks using the current benchmark suite from docs/benchmarks/object-serialization/native/java.

Serialization Throughput:

Java Serialization Throughput

Deserialization Throughput:

Java Deserialization Throughput

JSON Throughput:

Java JSON String ThroughputJava JSON UTF-8 Throughput

Cross-Language Throughput:

Java Cross-Language Throughput

Important: Fory's runtime code generation requires proper warm-up for performance measurement:

For additional benchmark notes, raw data, and the complete Java benchmark README, see Java Benchmarks.

Kotlin JSON Benchmark​

The Kotlin JSON harness compares Fory JSON Kotlin, kotlinx.serialization, Moshi, and Jackson Kotlin with one immutable model and 16 String/UTF-8 operations. See Kotlin JSON benchmarks for the workloads and benchmark setup.

Python Benchmark​

Fory Python demonstrates strong performance compared to pickle and Protobuf across object and list workloads.

Python Throughput

For benchmark setup, raw results, and reproduction steps, see Python Benchmarks.

Rust Benchmark​

Fory Rust demonstrates competitive performance compared to other Rust serialization frameworks.

Rust Throughput

Note: Results depend on hardware, dataset, and implementation versions. See the Rust benchmark report for the recorded environment, workloads, and reproduction command.

C++ Benchmark​

Fory C++ demonstrates competitive performance compared to Protobuf C++ serialization framework.

C++ Throughput

See the C++ benchmark report for the recorded environment, workloads, and reproduction command.

Go Benchmark​

Fory Go demonstrates strong performance compared to Protobuf and Msgpack across single-object and list workloads.

Go Throughput

Note: Results depend on hardware, dataset, and implementation versions. See the Go benchmark report for details.

C# Benchmark​

Fory C# demonstrates strong performance compared to Protobuf and Msgpack across typed object serialization and deserialization workloads.

C# Throughput

Note: Results depend on hardware and runtime versions. See the C# benchmark report for details.

Swift Benchmark​

Fory Swift demonstrates strong performance compared to Protobuf and Msgpack across both scalar-object and list workloads.

Swift Throughput

Note: Results depend on hardware and runtime versions. See the Swift benchmark report for details.

JavaScript Benchmark​

Fory JavaScript demonstrates strong performance compared to Protocol Buffers and JSON across representative Node.js workloads.

JavaScript Throughput

Note: Results depend on hardware, dataset, and runtime versions. See the JavaScript benchmark report for details.

Dart Benchmark​

Fory Dart demonstrates strong performance compared to Protocol Buffers across representative object and list workloads.

Dart Throughput

Note: Results depend on hardware, dataset, and runtime versions. See the Dart benchmark report for details.

Read Results Responsibly​

Start with Methodology, then open the report whose capability, language, schema, mode, and operation match your workload. The checked-in results are historical evidence from their recorded environment, not a guarantee for a different application or current main branch.