Run Time Stats

Client Side Rendered Tests

First Paint (ms)

Framework	First Paint	FCP	INP
Astro	89ms	88.93ms	1.92ms
Next.js	347.2ms	347.24ms	20.16ms
Nuxt	163ms	163.12ms	11.15ms
React Router	155.4ms	155.62ms	15.52ms
SolidStart	105ms	104.65ms	18.32ms
SvelteKit	112.2ms	112.18ms	9.38ms
TanStack Start	148.8ms	148.68ms	26.36ms

Methodology

Each framework renders a table of 1000 rows with two UUID columns
Measured using Lighthouse flow with Chromium via Puppeteer for accurate browser metrics
First Paint and First Contentful Paint are measured on initial navigation
Interaction to Next Paint is measured by clicking the first row's detail link
Benchmarks run 5 times and results are averaged
Next.js wraps the client-side rendered table in a dynamic import with ssr: false to prevent build-time prerendering
TanStack Start, Nuxt, SvelteKit, and SolidStart disable SSR per-route
React Router uses route-level clientLoader functions with HydrateFallback so the client-rendered routes are not server-rendered
Astro uses client-only React islands for client-side rendered routes
Client-side rendered tests use each framework's normal production build because SPA-only build modes are not supported consistently across the frameworks being compared
Astro uses React for its client-side rendered test: the benchmark table and detail components are React islands rendered with client:only="react", which prevents Astro from server-rendering those components and lets them render only in the browser. Astro's ClientRouter is not used for this CSR test because it enables client-side transitions and soft navigation behavior rather than client-only rendering.

Server Side Rendered Tests

First Paint (ms)

Framework	First Paint	FCP	INP
Astro	69ms	68.85ms	0.63ms
Next.js	132.6ms	132.6ms	17.31ms
Nuxt	90ms	89.98ms	12.08ms
React Router	95.6ms	95.55ms	20.62ms
SolidStart	100.6ms	100.61ms	15.33ms
SvelteKit	88.2ms	88.3ms	14.08ms
TanStack Start	120.6ms	120.69ms	29.5ms

Methodology

Each framework renders a table of 1000 rows with two UUID columns
Measured using Lighthouse flow with Chromium via Puppeteer for accurate browser metrics
First Paint and First Contentful Paint are measured on initial navigation
Interaction to Next Paint is measured by clicking the first row's detail link
Benchmarks run 5 times and results are averaged
The measured route is /server-side-rendered, and detail navigation uses /server-side-rendered/:id.

Server Side Throughput Tests

Ops/sec

Framework	Ops/sec	Median Latency	Body Size	Duplication
Baseline HTML	841	1.206ms	96.83kb	1x
Astro	529	1.836ms	99.82kb	1x
Mastro	515	1.912ms	181.95kb	1x
Next.js	217	4.819ms	199.57kb	2x
Nuxt	362	2.675ms	201.27kb	2x
React Router	345	2.868ms	211.63kb	2x
SolidStart	405	2.539ms	230.24kb	2x
SvelteKit	424	2.284ms	183.49kb	2x
TanStack Start	315	3.146ms	193.62kb	2x

Methodology

Each framework renders the dedicated /ssr-throughput route with a table of 1000 rows and UUID id/name columns
This route intentionally does not render the exact same table as the browser SSR and load tests: it omits detail links and framework link components so router, prefetch, and navigation metadata do not dominate the request-handler throughput measurement
Mock HTTP requests bypass TCP overhead so this measures request-handler rendering throughput rather than full server throughput
Data is loaded asynchronously to simulate real-world data fetching
Duplication factor indicates how many times each UUID appears in the response (1x = optimal, 2x = includes hydration payload)
Benchmarks run for 10 seconds using tinybench
Frameworks are invoked through their production request handlers where possible. Web API handlers are called with Request objects; Node.js handlers are called with mock IncomingMessage and ServerResponse objects.
Next.js renders the throughput table as a client component, matching the setup from PR #94, so the benchmark compares traditional server-rendered React + hydration work instead of making Next.js render every table row as React Server Components
Inspired by eknkc/ssr-benchmark

Server Side Load Test

P99 Latency

P99 Latency at 25 Connections

P90 Latency

P90 Latency at 25 Connections

Framework	Peak req/s	Peak Connections	P99 @ 25	P99 @ 50	P99 @ 100	Total Req.
Baseline HTML	1,629.8	50	20ms	44ms	107ms	48,210
Astro	693.6	25	58ms	116ms	1710ms	21,198
Next.js	34.4	1	2154ms	4693ms	4754ms	1,000
Nuxt	66	25	2051ms	4092ms	4375ms	2,088
React Router	176	50	269ms	1633ms	3971ms	5,724
SolidStart	60	10	3770ms	4055ms	4175ms	1,944
SvelteKit	497.4	25	78ms	290ms	2542ms	15,662
TanStack Start	42	5	4429ms	4150ms	4434ms	1,289

Methodology

Each framework serves the server-rendered table route over a real local HTTP server
The measured route is /server-side-rendered, using the same 1000-row UUID table as the SSR request throughput and browser rendering tests
Load is applied in staged connection counts, from 1 through 200 concurrent connections, with each stage running for approximately 5 seconds
Peak requests/sec is the highest successful stage throughput observed during the staged run
P90 and P99 latency are compared at the 25-, 50-, and 100-connection stages for every framework, so latency is measured under the same concurrency pressure
Total requests cover the full staged load run, not only the peak stage

Core Web Vitals Desktop

Good Largest Contentful Paint

Measures how fast a page's main content loads. To provide a good user experience, the LCP should be 2.5 seconds or less.

Framework	LCP%	CLS%	FCP%	TTFB%	INP%
SolidStart	91	66	91	83	100
Astro	91	87	91	82	97
Nuxt.js	65	57	67	59	95
SvelteKit	79	77	78	71	94
Next.js	72	69	76	67	94
React Router	61	62	66	70	90

Methodology

All Core Web Vitals for Desktop are sourced from HTTP Archive
Metrics refresh monthly

Run Time Stats

Client Side Rendered Tests

First Paint (ms)

First Contentful Paint (ms)

Interaction to Next Paint (ms)

Methodology

Server Side Rendered Tests

First Paint (ms)

First Contentful Paint (ms)

Interaction to Next Paint (ms)

Methodology

Server Side Throughput Tests

Ops/sec

Body Size

Median Latency

Methodology

Server Side Load Test

P99 Latency

P99 Latency at 25 Connections

P99 Latency at 50 Connections

P99 Latency at 100 Connections

P90 Latency

P90 Latency at 25 Connections

P90 Latency at 50 Connections

P90 Latency at 100 Connections

Methodology

Core Web Vitals Desktop

Good Largest Contentful Paint

Good Cumulative Layout Shift

Good First Contentful Paint

Good Time To First Byte

Good Interaction to Next Paint

Methodology